Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. 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  
  • Development and microbiology.Aja Watkins - 2021 - Biology and Philosophy 36 (4):1-30.
    On the basis of findings from developmental biology, some researchers have argued that evolutionary theory needs to be significantly updated. Advocates of such a “developmental update” have, among other things, suggested that we need to re-conceptualize units of selection, that we should expand our view of inheritance to include environmental as well as genetic and epigenetic factors, that we should think of organisms and their environment as involved in reciprocal causation, and that we should reevaluate the rates of evolutionary change. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • What’s all the fuss about? The inheritance of acquired traits is compatible with the Central Dogma.M. Polo Camacho - 2020 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 42 (3):1-15.
    The Central Dogma of molecular biology, which holds that DNA makes protein and not the other way around, is as influential as it is controversial. Some believe the Dogma has outlived its usefulness, either because it fails to fully capture the ins-and-outs of protein synthesis (Griffiths and Stotz, 2013; Stotz, 2006), because it turns on a confused notion of information (Sarkar, 2004), or because it problematically assumes the unidirectional flow of information from DNA to protein (Gottlieb, 2001). This paper evaluates (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Información Biológica: ¿La Teoría de la Información Ataca de Nuevo?María Ferreira Ruiz - 2019 - Manuscrito 42 (1):169-209.
    The philosophy of biology literature offers several arguments aimed at showing that information theory is conceptually unsuited to capture the informational talk in molecular biology. Such arguments led to the consensus that, if the informational talk in biology can be defended and explained at all, we need a different strategy. The debate, in fact, developed mostly along this line. However, recent contributions seem to (and even claim to) challenge the consensus and thus to vindicate the role and relevance of information (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark