Abstract
“Theoretical biology” is a surprisingly heterogeneous field, partly because it encompasses “doing theory” across disciplines as diverse as molecular biology, systematics, ecology, and evolutionary biology. Moreover, it is done in a stunning variety of different ways, using anything from formal analytical models to computer simulations, from graphic representations to verbal arguments. In this essay I survey a number of aspects of what it means to do theoretical biology, and how they compare with the allegedly much more restricted sense of theory in the physical sciences. I also tackle a recent trend toward the presentation of all-encompassing theories in the biological sciences, from general theories of ecology to a recent attempt to provide a conceptual framework for the entire set of biological disciplines. Finally, I discuss the roles played by philosophers of science in criticizing and shaping biological theorizing.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
There are, of course, dissenting views. Consider for instance what Carl Woese—a microbiologist, not a professional historian—has had to say about the role of physics in shaping twentieth century biology: “It is instructive to catalog some of the changes that fundamental reductionism wrought in our perception and practice of biology. Chief among these is that the biologist’s sense of what is important and what is fundamental was retooled to conform to the classical physicist’s perception thereof. From this followed changes in the biologist’s concept of organism, in his or her view of what constitutes an explanation, in what constitutes a “comprehensive” understanding of biology, in what biology’s relationship to the other sciences is, in what biology can tell us about the nature of reality, in what biology’s role in the society is, and in what biology’s future course will be. These in turn produced changes in how biological knowledge is organized—the structure of academic curricula, the nature and purview of biological disciplines and text books, the priorities of biological funding agencies—and an overall change in the perception of biology by the society itself. All has by now been set in stone” (Woese 2004, p. 174).
According to West et al. (1999) the 3/4 scaling is a result of basic physical constraints imposed on organismal metabolism, which is why it is universal, transcending the particular evolutionary history of those organisms.
I do not mean to imply that there are no such things as emergent properties, only that the concept is far from being clear (O'Connor 2006). And of course there are several physical but non-biological systems that also display emergent properties under at least some definitions of the term.
References
Baker A (2008) Experimental mathematics. Erkenntnis 68:331–344
Beatty J (1995) The evolutionary contingency thesis. In: Lennox JG, Wolters G (eds) Concepts, theories and rationality in the biological sciences. University of Konstanz Press, Konstanz; University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp 45-81
Burchfield JD (1974) Darwin and the dilemma of geological time. Isis 65:300–321
Carroll JW (2011) Laws of nature. In: Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2011/entries/laws-of-nature/. Accessed 22 June 2012
Cartwright N (1983) How the laws of physics lie. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Chang H (2004) Complementary science: history and philosophy of science as a continuation of science by other means. In: Inventing temperature: measuring scientific progress. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 235-250
Charlesworth B (1990) Optimization models, quantitative genetics, and mutation. Evolution 44:520–538
Cowperthwaite MC, Meyer LA (2007) How mutational networks shape evolution: lessons from RNA models. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 38:203–230
Crombach A, Hogeweg P (2008) Evolution of evolvability in gene regulatory networks. PLoS Comput Biol 4:1–13
Crow JF (2008) Mid-century controversies in population genetics. Genetics 42:1–16
Dawkins R (1976) The selfish gene. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Dennett DC (1995) Darwin’s dangerous idea. Simon and Schuster, New York
Dobzhansky T (1964) Biology, molecular and organismic. Am Zool 4:443–452
Dupré J (1983) The disunity of science. Mind 92:321–346
Eldredge N, Gould SJ (1977) Punctuated equilibria: the tempo and mode of evolution reconsidered. Paleobiology 3:115–151
Eldredge N, Thompson JN, Brakefield PM, Gavrilets S, Jablonski D, Jackson JBC, Lenski RE, Lieberman BS, McPeek MA, Miller W III (2005) The dynamics of evolutionary stasis. Paleobiology 31:133–145
Elgin M (2003) Biology and a priori laws. Philos Sci 70:1380–1389
Elgin M (2006) There may be strict empirical laws in biology, after all. Biol Philos 21:119–134
Estes S, Arnold SJ (2007) Resolving the paradox of stasis: models with stabilizing selection explain evolutionary divergence on all timescales. Am Nat 169:227–244
Falconer DS, Mackay T (1996) Introduction to quantitative genetics, 4th edn. Benjamin Cummings, San Francisco
Fisher RA (1930/1999) The genetical theory of natural selection: a complete variorum edition. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Gavrilets S (1997) Evolution and speciation on holey adaptive landscapes. Trends Ecol Evol 12:307–312
Gavrilets S (1999) A dynamical theory of speciation on holey adaptive landscapes. Am Nat 154:1–22
Giere RN (1999) Science without laws. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Gould SJ (2007) Contingency. In: Crowther PR, Briggs DEG (eds) Palaeobiology II. Blackwell, Malden, MA
Hardy G (1908) Mendelian proportions in a mixed population. Science 28:49–50
Hartl DL, Clark AG (2007) Principles of population genetics. Sinauer, Sunderland, MA
Hey J (1999) The neutralist, the fly and the selectionist. Trends Ecol Evol 14:35–38
Honjo K, Furukubo-Tokunaga K (2009) Distinctive neuronal networks and biochemical pathways for appetitive and aversive memory in Drosophila larvae. J Neurosci 29:852–862
Hubbell SP (2001) The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Kaplan J (2000) The limits and lies of human genetic research: dangers for social policy. Routledge, New York
Kaplan J (2009) The paradox of stasis and the nature of explanations in evolutionary biology. Philos Sci 76:797–808
Kaplan J, Winther RG (2012) Prisoners of abstraction? The theory and measure of genetic variation, and the very concept of “race.” Biol Theory 7. doi:10.1007/s13752-012-0048-0
Kimura M (1985) The neutral theory of molecular evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Kleffmann T, Russenberger D, von Zychlinski A, Christopher W, Sjolander K, Gruissem W, Baginsk S (2004) The Arabidopsis thaliana chloroplast proteome reveals pathway abundance and novel protein function. Curr Biol 14:354–362
Koertge L (ed) (2000) A house built on sand: exposing postmodernist myths about science. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Lande R, Arnold SJ (1983) The measurement of selection on correlated characters. Evolution 37:1210–1226
Lange M (2005) Ecological laws: what would they be and why would they matter? Oikos 110:394–403
Lockwood DR (2008) When logic fails ecology. Quart Rev Biol 83:57–64
Lynch M (2007) The frailty of adaptive hypotheses for the origins of organismal complexity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:8597–8604
Magnus PD (2011) Drakes, seadevils, and similarity fetishism. Biol Philos 26:857–870
Maynard-Smith J (1982) Evolution and the theory of games. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Mayr E, Provine W (eds) (1998) The evolutionary synthesis: perspectives on the unification of biology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Mikkelson GM (2003) Ecological kinds and ecological laws. Philos Sci 70:1390–1400
Newman SA, Müller GB (2000) Epigenetic mechanisms of character origination. J Exp Biol (Mol Devol Evol) 288:304–317
Nonacs P, Dill LM (1993) Is satisficing an alternative to optimal foraging theory? Oikos 67:371–375
O’Connor T (2006) Emergent properties. Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/properties-emergent/. Accessed 22 June 2012
Pigliucci M (2006) Genetic variance covariance matrices: a critique of the evolutionary quantitative genetics research program. Biol Philos 21:1–23
Pigliucci M (2008a) The proper role of population genetics in modern evolutionary theory. Biol Theory 3:316–324
Pigliucci M (2008b) Is evolvability evolvable? Nature Rev Genet 9:75–82
Pigliucci M (2008c) The borderlands between science and philosophy an introduction. Quart Rev Biol 83:7–15
Pigliucci M, Kaplan J (2006) Making sense of evolution: the conceptual foundations of evolutionary biology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Pigliucci M, Müller GB (eds) (2010) Evolution: the extended synthesis. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Scheiner SM (2010) Toward a conceptual framework for biology. Quart Rev Biol 85:293–318
Scheiner SM, Willig MR (2008) A general theory of ecology. Theor Ecol 1:21–28
Simpson GG (1944) Tempo and mode in evolution. Columbia University Press, New York
Smolin L (2007) The trouble with physics: the rise of string theory, the fall of a science, and what comes next. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston
Sober E (1993) The nature of selection: evolutionary theory in philosophical focus. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Stearns SC, Schmid-Hempel P (1987) Evolutionary insights should not be wasted. Oikos 49:118–125
Uebel T (2011) Vienna circle. Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2011/entries/vienna-circle/. Accessed 22 June 2012
Van Fraassen BC (1989) Laws and symmetry. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Weinberg W (1908) Über den Nachweis der Vererbung beim Menschen. Jahresh Ver vaterl Natkd Württ 64:368–382
West GB, Brown JH, Enquist BJ (1999) The fourth dimension of life: fractal geometry and allometric scaling of organisms. Science 284:1677–1679
Wimsatt WC (1997) Aggregativity: reductive heuristics for finding emergence. Philos Sci 64:S372–S384
Woese CR (2004) A new biology for a new century. Microbiol Mol Biol R 68:173–186
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pigliucci, M. On the Different Ways of “Doing Theory” in Biology. Biol Theory 7, 287–297 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-012-0047-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-012-0047-1