7 found
Order:
See also
Lennart Olsson
Lund University
  1. Is Resilience a Normative Concept?Henrik Thorén & Lennart Olsson - 2018 - Resilience: International Policies, Practices and Discourses 2 (6):112-128.
    In this paper, we engage with the question of the normative content of the resilience concept. The issues are approached in two consecutive steps. First, we proceed from a narrow construal of the resilience concept – as the ability of a system to absorb a disturbance – and show that under an analysis of normative concepts as evaluative concepts resilience comes out as descriptive. In the second part of the paper, we argue that (1) for systems of interest (primarily social (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  20
    Why Resilience is Unappealing to Social Science : Theoretical and Empirical Investigations of the Scientific Use of Resilience.Lennart Olsson, Anne Jerneck, Henrik Thorén, Johannes Persson & David O. Byrne - unknown
    Resilience is often promoted as a boundary concept to integrate the social and natural dimensions of sustainability. However, it is a troubled dialogue from which social scientists may feel detached. To explain this, we first scrutinize the meanings, attributes, and uses of resilience in ecology and elsewhere to construct a typology of definitions. Second, we analyze core concepts and principles in resilience theory that cause disciplinary tensions between the social and natural sciences. Third, we provide empirical evidence of the asymmetry (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  3.  35
    The Road From Haeckel: The Jena Tradition in Evolutionary Morphology and the Origins of “Evo-Devo”. [REVIEW]Uwe Hoßfeld & Lennart Olsson - 2003 - Biology and Philosophy 18 (2):285-307.
    With Carl Gegenbaur and Ernst Haeckel, inspiredby Darwin and the cell theory, comparativeanatomy and embryology became established andflourished in Jena. This tradition wascontinued and developed further with new ideasand methods devised by some of Haeckelsstudents. This first period of innovative workin evolutionary morphology was followed byperiods of crisis and even a disintegration ofthe discipline in the early twentieth century.This stagnation was caused by a lack ofinterest among morphologists in Mendeliangenetics, and uncertainty about the mechanismsof evolution. Idealistic morphology was stillinfluental in (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  4.  17
    The Interdisciplinary Decision Problem : Popperian Optimism and Kuhnian Pessimism in Forestry.Johannes Persson, Henrik Thorén & Lennart Olsson - forthcoming - Ecology and Society.
    Interdisciplinary research in the fields of forestry and sustainability studies often encounters seemingly incompatible ontological assumptions deriving from natural and social sciences. The perceived incompatibilities might emerge from the epistemological and ontological claims of the theories or models directly employed in the interdisciplinary collaboration, or they might be created by other epistemological and ontological assumptions that these interdisciplinary researchers find no reason to question. In this paper we discuss the benefits and risks of two possible approaches, Popperian optimism and Kuhnian (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  12
    The History of EvoDevo and the Influence of the 1981 Dahlem Workshop on Evolution and Development.Lennart Olsson - 2016 - Biological Theory 11 (1):47-49.
  6.  5
    Alexei Sewertzoff and Adolf Naef: Revising Haeckel’s Biogenetic Law.Georgy S. Levit, Uwe Hossfeld & Lennart Olsson - 2015 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 36 (3):357-370.
    Ernst Haeckel formulated his biogenetic law, famously stating that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny, in 1872. The Russian evolutionist Alexei Sewertzoff, and the Swiss-born zoologist Adolf Naef were among those who revised Haeckel’s law, thus changing the course of evolutionary theory and of developmental biology. Although Sewertzoff and Naef approached the problem in a similar way and formulated similar hypotheses at a purely descriptive level, their theoretical viewpoints were crucially different. While Sewertzoff laid the foundations for a Darwinian evolutionary morphology and is (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7.  9
    Molecular Mimicry of Carbohydrate and Protein Structures by Hybridoma Antibodies.Lennart Olsson - 1987 - Bioessays 7 (3):116-119.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark