Universität Wien

300182 SE Selected problems in the philosophy of biology (2010S)

2.00 ECTS (2.00 SWS), SPL 30 - Biologie
Continuous assessment of course work

Vorbesprechung am 10.03.2010 um 17 Uhr im Seminarraum Theoretische Biologie, UZA 1, Biozentrum Althanstraße 14, 1090 Wien, 2. Ebene, 4. Spange

Registration/Deregistration

Note: The time of your registration within the registration period has no effect on the allocation of places (no first come, first served).

Details

max. 35 participants
Language: German

Lecturers

Classes

Currently no class schedule is known.

Information

Aims, contents and method of the course

1. What is philosophy of biology?
2. Topic 1: Reduction/emergence
3. Topic 2: Adaptationism and its limits
4. Topic 3: Do genes encode information about phenotypic parts?
5. Topic 4: EvoDevo and the Evolutionary Synthesis

Assessment and permitted materials

Participation in group discussions; Powerpoint presentation on one of the four topics at the end of the seminar.

Minimum requirements and assessment criteria

To become acquainted with the way contemporary philosophers of biology deal with conceptual and methodological issues in the life sciences.

Examination topics

Introduction to the themes by the instructor; individual readings on the aforementioned topics; group discussions.

Reading list

Readings:

1. What is philosophy of biology?

Brandon R, Rosenberg A (2000) Philosophy of biology. In: Philosophy of Science Today (Clark P, Hawley K, eds), 147—180. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Callebaut W (2005) Again, what the philosophy of biology is not. Acta Biotheoretica 53: 93—122.

Krohs U, Toepfer G (2005) Einleitung. In: Philosophie er Biologie: Eine Einführung (Krohs U, Toepfer G, Hg), 7—15. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

Rosenberg A ([1985] 2002) Biology and its philosophy. In: Philosophy of Science (Balashov Y, Rosenberg A, eds), 22—36. New York: Routledge.

2. Reduction/emergence

Dupré J (2010) It is not possible to reduce biological explanations to explanations in chemistry and/or physics. In: Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology (Ayala F, Arp R, eds), 32—47. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

Feyerabend P ([1962] 2002) Explanation, reduction, and empiricism. In: Philosophy of Science: Contemporary Readings (Balashov Y, Rosenberg A, eds), 141—162. New York: Routledge.

Keller EF (2010) It is not possible to reduce biological explanations to explanations in chemistry and/or physics. In: Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology (Ayala F, Arp R, eds), 19—31. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

Sober E ([1999] 2010) The multiple realizability argument against reductionism.
In: Philosophy of Biology: An Anthology (Rosenberg A, Arp R, eds), 235—249. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.

3. Adaptationism and its limits

Gould SJ, Vrba ES ([1982] 1998) Exaptation—A missing term in the science of form. In: The Philosophy of Biology (Hull DL, Ruse M, eds), 52—71. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lewens T (2009) Seven types of adaptationism. Biology and Philosophy 24: 161—182.

Stegmann U (2005) Die Adaptationismus-Debatte. In: Philosophie er Biologie: Eine Einführung (Krohs U, Toepfer G, Hg), 287—303. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

West-Eberhard MJ ([1992] 1998) Adaptation: Current usages. In: The Philosophy of Biology (Hull DL, Ruse M, eds), 8—14. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

4. Do genes encode information about phenotypic parts?

Godfrey-Smith P (2004) Genes do not enoode information for phenotypic traits. In: Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Science (Hitchcock C, ed), 275—289. Oxford: Blackwell.

Keller EF (2009) Rethinking the meaning of biological information. Biological Theory 4: 159—166.

Maynard Smith J (2000) The role of information in biology. Philosophy of Science 67: 177—194.

Sarkar S (2004) Genes enoode information for phenotypic traits. In: Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Science (Hitchcock C, ed), 259—274. Oxford: Blackwell.

5. EvoDevo and the Evolutionary Synthesis

Amundson R ([1994] 1998) Two concepts of constraint: Adaptationism and the challenge from developmental biology. In: The Philosophy of Biology (Hull DL, Ruse M, eds), 93—116. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Laubichler MD (2010) Evolutionary developmental biology offers a significant challenge to the neo-Darwinian paradigm. In: Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Science (Hitchcock C, ed), 199—212. Oxford: Blackwell.

Minelli A (2010) Evolutionary developmental biology does not offer a significant challenge to the neo-Darwinian paradigm. In: Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Science (Hitchcock C, ed), 213—226. Oxford: Blackwell.

Müller GB (2007) Evo-devo: Extending the evolutionary synthesis. Nature Reviews Genetics 8: 942—949.

Association in the course directory

WZB

Last modified: Mo 07.09.2020 15:43