Yagel Gouvêa, Devin Susanne (Author)
Richards, Robert John (Advisor)
Conceptual change often accompanies the development of scientific knowledge over time. Scientists also frequently disagree about what exactly their core concepts mean and how they should be applied. Why is this the case, and what makes these dynamic concepts work as well as they do? This dissertation addresses that larger problem by way of a smaller one involving a particularly important biological concept. Homology relates corresponding parts in different organisms—for instance the human arm, bat wing, and whale flipper are all vertebrate forelimbs despite their differences in form and function. Biologists have specified the nature of this relationship quite differently over a period of more than 150 years, and they continue to do so today. How can such a central concept be so difficult to pin down? Philosophical analyses of ‘homology’ typically collapse its many contemporary variants into two or three major theoretical accounts of what makes homologous body parts “the same.” By examining four key historical episodes, I argue that a much richer characterization of the concept is necessary to make sense of its formation and subsequent development. Richard Owen’s original definition was just one part of a complex research program that provided cohesion to later and otherwise quite diverse studies. A mid-twentieth century conflict over Owen’s legacy decisively altered the conceptualization of homology in evolutionary biology. G. G. Simpson and Alan Boyden disagreed as to whether the evolutionary explanation of homologous resemblance belonged in the definition of the concept. More recently, differences over how to determine, represent, and interpret homology have rent a small group of systematists who identify themselves as intellectual descendants of Willi Hennig. Finally, ongoing attempts to resolve avian wing digit homology challenge any simple association between disciplines and accounts of homology. My analysis of the homology case motivates a novel general model of conceptual change according to which certain scientific concepts are essentially dynamic. Scientists initially adopt such concepts because they identify a phenomenon worth studying and consolidate promising epistemic resources for that study. These resources are both material and cognitive in nature. In addition to theoretical definitions of the concept, they may include specialized techniques, sources of data, operational criteria, and known examples. The coordination of these resources represents a valuable achievement or exemplar for the ongoing use of the concept. Change and variation in its use follow naturally from the epistemic complexity of scientific research and from the spatiotemporal complexity of the systems it targets. The course of subsequent research also depends on the aims of individual scientists and the development of new techniques and methods in their wider fields of study. My model suggests approaches to the study of conceptual change that are likely to apply to other concepts in biology and perhaps beyond.
...More
Article
Devin Y. Gouvêa;
(2023)
Historicizing the homology problem
Article
Mary P. Winsor;
(2021)
“I would sooner die than give up”: Huxley and Darwin's deep disagreement
Article
Pedroso, Makmiller;
(2012)
Essentialism, History, and Biological Taxa
Article
Christopher H. Pearson;
(2018)
Theoricity and Homology: A Reply to Roffe, Ginnobili, and Blanco
Article
Olivier Rieppel;
(2020)
Morphology and Phylogeny
Article
Marco Tamborini;
(2022)
Organic form and evolution: The morphological problem in twentieth-century italian biology
Book
Langanke, Martin;
(2003)
Wege der Evolutionsgeschichtsschreibung: Wissenschaftstheoretische Untersuchungen zu den Methoden der Phylogenetischen Systemat
Article
Billinger, Michael S.;
(2007)
Racial Classification in the Evolutionary Sciences: A Comparative Analysis
Book
Richard A. Richards;
(2016)
Biological Classification: A Philosophical Introduction
Book
Maureen O'Malley;
(2014)
Philosophy of Microbiology
Article
Andrea Gambarotto;
Auguste Nahas;
(2022)
Teleology and the organism: Kant's controversial legacy for contemporary biology
Article
Lyons, Sherrie Lynne;
(2002)
Thomas Kuhn Is Alive and Well: The Evolutionary Relationships of Simple Life Forms--A Paradigm Under Siege?
Thesis
Brigandt, Ingo;
(2006)
A Theory of Conceptual Advance: Explaining Conceptual Change in Evolutionary, Molecular, and Evolutionary Developmental Biology
Article
Ebach, Malte C.;
Williams, David M.;
(2007)
An Outline of the Foundations of Systematics and Biogeography
Book
Lorenzo Baravalle;
Luciana Zaterka;
(2020)
Life and Evolution: Latin American Essays on the History and Philosophy of Biology
Article
Miguel García-Valdecasas;
Terrence W. Deacon;
(2024)
Biological functions are causes, not effects: A critique of selected effects theories
Article
William E. Friedman;
Peter K. Endress;
(2020)
Alexander Moritzi, a Swiss Pre-Darwinian Evolutionist: Insights into the Creationist-Transmutationist Debates of the 1830s and 1840s
Book
Neal Baer;
(2024)
The Promise and Peril of CRISPR
Article
Ariel Jonathan Roffé;
Santiago Ginnobili;
Daniel Blanco;
(2018)
Theoricity, Observation and Homology: A Response to Pearson
Article
Mathilde Lequin;
(2022)
Comment nommer la lignée humaine ? De l’ordre des Bimanes à la sous-tribu des hominiens
Be the first to comment!