Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Who's afraid of epigenetics? Habits, instincts, and Charles Darwin’s evolutionary theory.Mauro Mandrioli & Mariagrazia Portera - 2021 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 43 (1):1-23.
    Our paper aims at bringing to the fore the crucial role that habits play in Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution by means of natural selection. We have organized the paper in two steps: first, we analyse value and functions of the concept of habit in Darwin's early works, notably in his Notebooks, and compare these views to his mature understanding of the concept in the Origin of Species and later works; second, we discuss Darwin’s ideas on habits in the light (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Could the Greatest Illusion of the Modern Synthesis Be Practical?M. Polo Camacho - forthcoming - Biosemiotics:1-6.
    According to Denis Noble, one of the greatest illusions of the Modern Synthesis is embodied in the Central Dogma, a principle first formulated by Francis Crick in 1958. The principle holds that DNA makes protein, not the other way around. For Noble, the Dogma has contributed to the illusion that genes alone are responsible for the development and evolution of an organism’s phenotype. Though I am largely sympathetic to Noble’s critique, I argue that there may be alternative grounds for accepting (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Beyond descriptive accuracy: The central dogma of molecular biology in scientific practice.M. Polo Camacho - 2021 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 86 (C):20-26.
    There is no denying the Central Dogma’s impact on the biological sciences. Since the Dogma’s formulation by Francis Crick in 1958, however, many have debated the Dogma’s empirical adequacy. My aim is to move beyond these discussions, and instead consider the Central Dogma’s significance to contemporary biological practice. To do this, I consider four distinct approaches for determining the non-descriptive methodological significance of a scientific principle. I argue that these approaches fail to vindicate the Central Dogma, and that, under many (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations