Why genes are like lemons

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 57 (June):88-95 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In the last few years, the lack of a unitary notion of gene across biological sciences has troubled the philosophy of biology community. However, the debate on this concept has remained largely historical or focused on particular cases presented by the scientific empirical advancements. Moreover, in the literature there are no explicit and reasonable arguments about why a philosophical clarification of the concept of gene is needed. In our paper, we claim that a philosophical clarification of the concept of gene does not contribute to biology. Unlike the question, for example, “What is a biological function?”, we argue that the question “What is a gene?” could be answered by means of empirical research, in the sense that biologists' labour is enough to shed light on it.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,597

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Gene-concept pluralism, causal specificity, and information. [REVIEW]Ronald J. Planer - forthcoming - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences.
On the nature of the gene , Creating a physical biology: The three-man paper and early molecular biology). [REVIEW]Raphael Falk - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (4):623-625.
Gene expression and the concept of the phenotype.Ohad Nachtomy, Ayelet Shavit & Zohar Yakhini - 2007 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 38 (1):238-254.
What's all this fuss about the gene?Robert Olby - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 49:66-69.
Gene.Paul E. Griffiths & Karola Stotz - 2007 - In David L. Hull & Michael Ruse (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Biology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
The gene genie: good fairy or wicked witch?Sheila A. M. McLean - 2001 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 32 (4):723-739.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-05-05

Downloads
113 (#190,282)

6 months
8 (#597,840)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Emanuele Ratti
University of Bristol
Federico Boem
University of Twente

References found in this work

Functional analysis.Robert E. Cummins - 1975 - Journal of Philosophy 72 (November):741-64.
Natural kinds and biological taxa.John Dupré - 1981 - Philosophical Review 90 (1):66-90.
Is semantics possible?Hilary Putnam - 1970 - Metaphilosophy 1 (3):187–201.
Structuralism and the notion of dependence.Øystein Linnebo - 2008 - Philosophical Quarterly 58 (230):59-79.

View all 16 references / Add more references