The key role of underlying theories for scientific explanations. A darwinian case study

Authors

  • Daniel Blanco Universidad Nacional del Litoral
  • Ariel Roffé Universidad de Buenos Aires - CONICET
  • Santiago Ginnobili Universidad de Buenos Aires - CONICET

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5007/1808-1711.2020v24n3p617

Keywords:

Circular explanation, homology, structuralism, T-theoretical terms, theory of common ancestry

Abstract

A given explanatory theory T falls into circular reasoning if the only way to determine its explanandum is through the application of T. To find an (often previous) underlying theory T′ that determines T′s explanandum helps us save T from this accusation of circularity. We follow the structuralist view of theories in presenting and dealing with this issue, by applying it to particular theories. More specifically, we focus on the relationship between the Darwinian theory of common ancestry and the determination of homologies.

References

Aboitiz, F. 1988. Homology: A comparative or a Historical Concept? Acta Biotheoretica 37: 27–29.

Amundson, R. 2005. The Changing Role of the Embryo in Evolutionary Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Appel, T. 1987. The Cuvier-Geoffroy Debate: French Biology in the Decades before Darwin. New York: Oxford University Press.

Balzer, W. and Moulines, C. 1980. On Theoreticity. Synthese 44: 467–494.

Balzer, W., Moulines, C. and J. Sneed (1987) An Architectonic for Science: The Structuralist Program. Dordrecht: Reidel.

Bar-Hillel, Y. 1970. Neorealism vs. Neopositivism. In Y. Bar-Hillel (ed.) Aspects of Language. Jerusalem, Magnes Press, pp. 263–72.

Blanco, D. 2012. Primera aproximación estructuralista a la Teoría del Origen en Común. Agora 31: 171-194.

Boyden, A. 1969. Homology and Analogy. Science 164: 455–456.

Brady, R. 1985. On the Independence of Systematics. Cladistics 1:113–126.

Brower, A. 2000. Evolution Is Not a Necessary Assumption of Cladistics. Cladistics 16:143–156.

Brower, A. 2019. Background Knowledge: The Assumptions of Pattern Cladistics. Cladistics 35:717–731.

Burian, R. 1992. Adaptation: Historical Perspectives. In: E. Keller and E. Lloyd (eds.) Keywords in evolutionary biology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 7–12.

Caponi, G. 2011. La segunda agenda darwiniana. México: CEFPSVLT.

Caponi, G. 2013. Teleología Naturalizada: Los conceptos de función, aptitud y adaptación en la Teoría de la Selección Natural. Theoria 76: 97–114.

Cummins, R. 1975. Functional Analysis. Journal of Philosophy 72: 741–764.

Darwin, C. 1851. A Monograph of the Sub-class Cirripedia, Vol. 1. London: The Ray Society.

Darwin, C. 1859. On the Origin of Species. London: John Murray, 6th ed. 1872.

de Beer, G. 1971. Homology, an Unsolved Problem. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

de Pinna, M. 1991. Concepts and Tests of Homology in the Cladistic Paradigm. Cladistics 7: 367–394.

Diez, J. 2002. A Program for the Individuation of Scientific Concepts. Synthese 130: 13–48.

Díez, J. 2012. Inconmensurabilidad, comparabilidad empírica y escenas observacionales. In: P. Lorenzano and O. Nudler (eds.) El camino desde Kuhn. La inconmensurabilidad hoy. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva, pp. 67-118.

Falguera, J. 2012. Comparación epistémica de teorías inconmensurables, sin fundamentismo. In: P. Lorenzano and O. Nudler (eds.), El camino desde Kuhn. La inconmensurabilidad hoy. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva, pp. 119-70.

Fleck, L. 1986. La génesis y el desarrollo de un hecho científico. Madrid: Alianza.

Griffiths, P. 2007. The Phenomena of Homology. Biology & Philosophy 2: 643–658.

Hanson, N. 1958. Patterns of Discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hempel, C. 1970. On the ‘Standard Conception’ of Scientific Theories. In: S. Radner (ed.) Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. IV. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 142-63.

Hempel, C. and Oppenheim, P. 1948. Studies in the Logic of Explanation. Philosophy of Science 15: 135–175.

Kamlah, A. 1976. An Improved Definition of “Theoretical in a Given Theory. Erkenntnis 10: 349–359.

Lankester, E. 1870. On the use of the term homology in modern zoology. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 6: 34–43.

Lewis, D. 1970. How to Define Theoretical Terms. The Journal of Philosophy 66: 427–446.

Lorenzano, P. 2012a. Base empírica global de contrastación, base empírica local de contrastación y aserción empírica de una teoría. Ágora 31: 71–107.

Lorenzano, P. 2012b. Estructuras y aplicaciones intencionales: Inconmensurabilidad teórica y comparabilidad empírica en la historia de la genética clásica. In: P. Lorenzano and O. Nudler (eds.) El camino desde Kuhn. La inconmensurabilidad hoy. Madrid: Biblioteca nueva, pp. 289-350.

Lorenzo, G. 2015. Homology, an (Un)Solved Problem. Teorema 34: 211–223.

Mayr, E. and Ashlock, P. 1991. Principles of Systematic Zoology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Mivart, G. 1870. On the Use of the Term ‘Homology’. The Annals and Magazine of Natural History 32:113–121.

Owen, R. 1843. Lectures on the Comparative Anatomy and Physiology of the Invertebrate Animals. London: Longman Brown Green and Longmans.

Owen, R. 1847. On the Archetype and Homologies of the Vertebrate Skeleton. London: John Taylor.

Owen, R. 1849. On the Nature of Limbs. London: John Van Voorst.

Padian, K. 2007. Richard Owen’s Quadrophenia. The Pull of Opposing Forces in Victorian Cosmogony. In: R. Amundson (ed.) On the Nature of Limbs. A discourse by Richard Owen. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, pp. 53–91.

Pearson, C. 2010. Pattern Cladism, Homology, and Theory-Neutrality. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 32: 475–492.

Putnam, H. 1962. What Theories are Not. In: E. Nagel, P. Suppes and A. Tarski (eds.) Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science. Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 240–251.

Remane A. 1952. Die Grundlagen des natürlichen Systems der vergleichenden Anatomie und der Phylogenetik. Leipzig: Portig.

Roffé, A. 2020. Dynamic Homology and Circularity in Cladistic Analysis. Biology & Philosophy (forthcoming).

Roffé, A, S. Ginnobili and D. Blanco. 2018. Theoricity, Observation and Homology: A Response to Pearson. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 40: 1-8.

Rosenberg, A. and Neander, K. 2009. Are homologies (selected effect or causal role) function free? Philosophy of Science 76: 307–334.

Rupke, N. 2009. Richard Owen: Biology without Darwin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Saint-Hilaire, G. 1830. Principes de Philosophie Zoologiqués. Paris: Rousseau Libraire.

Sneed, J. 1971. The Logical Structure of Mathematical Physics. Dordrecht-Holland: Reidel.

Wagner, G. 1989. The Biological Homology Concept. Annual review of Ecology and Systematics, 20: 51–69.

Wagner, G. 2014. Homology, Genes, and Evolutionary Innovation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

West–Eberhard, M. 1992. Adaptation: Current Usages. In: E. Keller and E. Lloyd (eds.), Keywords in evolutionary biology, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 13–18.

Downloads

Published

2020-12-15

Issue

Section

Articles