首页> 外文期刊>Journal for general philosophy of science >Pluralizing Darwin: Making Counter-Factual History of Science Significant
【24h】

Pluralizing Darwin: Making Counter-Factual History of Science Significant

机译:达尔文的颠覆:使逆实例的科学史

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Abstract In the wake of recent attempts at alternate history (Bowler 2013), this paper suggests several avenues for a pluralistic approach to Charles Darwin and his role in the history of evolutionary theory. We examine in what sense Darwin could be described as a major driver of theoretical change in the history of biology. First, this paper examines how Darwin influenced the future of biological science: not merely by stating the fact of evolution or by bringing evidence for it; but by discovering natural selection, and giving it pre-eminence over any other mechanism for evolution; and also by proposing a masterful and quite unique synthesis of many scientific fields. Contrasting Darwin’s views with those of A.R. Wallace, I conclude that “natural selection” is clearly an original contribution, that it had no forerunners or co-discoverers, and could barely have appeared after Darwin conceived of it. This specificity of Darwin’s contribution is an invitation to be strongly presentist (Loison 2016) and to adopt only weak counter-factuals. In contrast, there are possible ways to use strong counter-factuals as attempts to “pluralize” the history of biological theory: i.e. imagine new possible avenues for the development of evolutionary biology. The idea that evolution was a theory “in the air” suggests that evolutionary theory could have developed in a world without Darwin, especially if we accept to delete not only “Darwin” but “England”. France and Germany are examined as possible countries where evolutionary ideas would have thrived even with no contribution from the English scientists. Finally, the paper suggests another counter-factual hypothesis: deleting not Darwin and his Origin but the Darwin Industry itself. This may allow us to read the Origin of Species with fresh eyes and to discover Darwin’s life-long interest in variation and its laws, as many of his early readers did.
机译:摘要在最近替代历史的尝试之后(Bowler 2013),这篇论文提出了几种途径,即富豪达尔文的多元化方法及其在进化理论史上的作用。我们审视了达尔文可以被描述为生物学史的理论变化的主要驱动因素。首先,本文探讨了达尔文如何影响生物科学的未来:不仅仅是通过陈述演变的事实或为其带来证据;但通过发现自然选择,并在任何其他换档机制上给予它的前卓越;并且还通过提出许多科学领域的庞大和相当独特的合成。对比达尔文的观点与A.R.华莱士,我得出结论,“自然选择”显然是一个原始贡献,即它没有先行者或共同发现者,并且在达尔文构想它之后几乎没有出现。达尔文贡献的这种特殊性是强烈呈现的邀请(2016年的贷款)并仅采用弱势事实。相比之下,有可能使用强大的反事实的方法作为“颠覆”生物学理论的历史的尝试:即想象出新的可能的进化生物学途径。演变是一个“空中”理论的想法表明,进化理论可以在没有达尔文的世界中发展,特别是如果我们不仅可以删除“达尔文”但是英格兰“。法国和德国被审查为即使没有英国科学家的贡献也会繁殖进化思想的可能国家。最后,本文提出了另一个反异天假设:删除不是达尔文及其起源,而是达尔文产业本身。这可能让我们阅读用新鲜的眼睛读取物种的起源,并发现达尔文对变异的终身兴趣及其法律,以及他的许多早期读者所做的。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号