Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

From physics to biology: physicists in the search for systemic biological explanations

  • Paper in History and Philosophy of Science
  • Published:
European Journal for Philosophy of Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper offers a contribution to debates around integrative aspects of systems biology and engages with issues related to the circumstances under which physicists look at biological problems. We use oral history as one of the methodological tools to gather the empirical material, conducting interviews with physicists working in systems biology. The interviews were conducted at several institutions in Brazil, Germany, Israel and the U.S. Biological research has been increasingly dependent on computational methods, high-throughput technologies, and multidisciplinary skills. Quantitative scientists are joining biological departments and collaborations between physicists and biologists are particularly vigorous. This state of affairs raises a number of questions, such as: What are the circumstances under which physicists approach biological problems in systems biology? What kind of interdisciplinary challenges must be tackled? The paper suggests that, concerning physicists’ move to work on biological systems, there are common reasons to move, the transition must be understood in terms of degrees, physicists have a rationale for simplifying systems, and distinct conceptions of model and modeling strategies are recurrent. We identified problems regarding linguistic clarity and integration of epistemological aims. We conclude that cultural unconformities within the systems biology community have important consequences to the flow of scientific knowledge.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Systems biology is one of the funding priorities in the United States, Germany, and Israel. However, Brazil does not have a systems biology network developed to the same extent. In this country systems biology is currently in the process of establishing itself as a new field. The Brazilian physicist interviewed, Suani Pinho, identified herself as a systems biologist based on her research interests and approaches.

  2. This conversation is considered separately from the interviews because the subject matters addressed went far beyond those considered in the semi-structured interviews. Also, she transitioned into biology three decades before the other researchers interviewed.

  3. https://www.aip.org/history-programs/niels-bohr-library/oral-histories, accessed on March 25, 2018.

  4. The physicist’s identity is not omitted here because the published paper is also cited. Moreover, nothing really confidential is stated in the paragraph; on the contrary, we are referring to well-known features of Alon’s work.

  5. The physicist’s identity is not omitted here because the published paper is also cited. Moreover, nothing really confidential is stated in the paragraph; on the contrary, we are referring to well-known features of Stavans’ work.

References

  • Allen, J. F. (2001). Bioinformatics and discovery: Induction beckons again. BioEssays, 23, 104–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alon, U. (2006). An introduction to systems biology: Design principles of biological circuits. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman and Hall/CRC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amir, A., Meshner, S., Beatus, T., & Stavans, J. (2010). Damped oscillations in the adaptive response of the Iron homeostasis network of E. Coli. Molecular Microbiology, 76, 428–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agrawal, A. (1999). New institute to study systems biology. Nature Biotechnology, 17, 743–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auffray, C., Imbeaud, S., Roux-Rouquié, M., & Hood, L. (2003). From functional genomics to systems biology: Concepts and practices. Comptes Rendus Biologies, 326, 879–892.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batterman, R. W., & Rice, C. C. (2014). Minimal model explanations. Philosophy of Science, 81, 349–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohr, N. (1933). Light and life. Nature, 133, 457–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boogerd, F., Bruggeman, F., Hofmeyr, J.-H., & Westerhoff, H. V. (Eds.). (2007). Systems biology: Philosophical foundations. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, S. (2010). Sequences and consequences. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 365, 207–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruggeman, F. J., & Westerhoff, H. V. (2007). The nature of systems biology. Trends in Microbiology, 15, 45–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvert, J., & Fujimura, J. H. (2011). Calculating life? Duelling discourses in interdisciplinary systems biology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 42, 155–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carusi, A. (2016). In silico medicine: Social, technological and symbolic mediation. Humana-Mente Journal of Philosophical Studies, 30, 67–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carusi, A. (2014). Validation and variability: Dual challenges on the path from systems biology to systems medicine. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science C., 48, 28–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carusi, A. (2011). Computational biology and the limits of shared vision. Perspectives on Science, 19, 300–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carusi, A. (2008). Scientific visualisations and aesthetic grounds for trust. Ethics and Information Technology, 10, 243–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandrasekharan, S., & Nersessian, N. J. (2013). Computational modeling: Is this the end of thought experiments in science? In M. Frappier, L. Meynell, & J. R. Brown (Eds.), Thought experiments in philosophy, science and the arts (pp. 239–260). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, I. R., & Harel, D. (2007). Explaining a complex living system: Dynamics, multi-scaling and emergence. Journal of the Royal Society: Interface, 4, 175–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daneholt, Bertil. 2006. Advanced information: RNA interference. The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. http://web.archive.org/web/20070120113455/http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2006/adv.html. Accessed 25 November 2017.

  • De Chadarevian, S. (2002). Designs for Life. Molecular Biology after World War II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delbrück, M. (1949). A physicist looks at biology. Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, 38, 173–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Descamps, F. (2010). Histoire orale. In C. Delacroix, F. Dosse, P. Garcia, & N. Offenstadt (Eds.), Historiographies, I: Concepts et débats (pp. 391–398). Paris: Galimard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Domany, E. (2000). Protein folding in contact map space. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 288, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eddy, S. R. (2001). Non-coding RNA genes and the modern RNA world. Nature Reviews Genetics, 2, 919–929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El-Hani, C. N., & Emmeche, C. (2000). On some theoretical grounds for an organism-centered biology: Property emergence, supervenience, and downward causation. Theory in Biosciences, 119, 234–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, T.-F., Liu, D.-R., & Liau, C.-J. (2005). Justification and hypothesis selection in data mining. In T. Y. Lin, S. Ohsuga, C.-J. Liau, X. Hu, & S. Tsumoto (Eds.), Foundations of data mining and knowledge discovery (pp. 119–130). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagan, M. B. (2016). Stem cells and systems models: Clashing views of explanation. Synthese, 193, 873–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, D. (1968). Emigre physicists and the biological revolution. In D. Fleming & B. Bailyn (Eds.), The intellectual migration (pp. 152–189). Cambridge, MA: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frické, M. (2015). Big data and its epistemology. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 66, 651–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuerst, J. A. (1982). The role of reductionism in the development of molecular biology: Peripheral or central? Social Studies of Science, 12, 241–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galison, P. L. (1996). Computer simulation and the trading zone. In P. L. Galison & D. J. Stump (Eds.), The disunity of science: Boundaries, contexts, and power (pp. 118–157). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galison, P. L. (1997). Image and logic: A material culture of microphysics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, A., & Troup, K. (1990). The houses of history: A critical reader in twentieth-century history and theory. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, S., & Jones, N. (2016). Constraint-based reasoning for search and explanation: Strategies for understanding variation and patterns in biology. Dialectica, 70, 343–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, S. (2017). Philosophy of systems biology: Perspectives from scientists and philosophers. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Green, S., Şerban, M., Scholl, R., Jones, N., Brigandt, I., & Bechtel, W. (2018). Network analyses in systems biology: New strategies for dealing with biological complexity. Synthese, 194(4), 1751–1175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, L. (2003). Systems biology: Integrating technology, biology, and computation. Mechanisms of Ageing and Development, 124, 9–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoddeson, L. (2006). The conflict of memories and documents: Dilemmas and pragmatics of oral history. In T. Söderqvist & R. E. Doel (Eds.), The historiography of contemporary science, technology, and medicine: Writing Recent Science (pp. 187–200). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ideker, T., Galitski, T., & Hood, L. (2001). A new approach to decoding life: Systems biology. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 2, 343–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joaquim, L., Freire, O., & El-Hani, C. N. (2015). Quantum explorers: Bohr, Jordan, and Delbrück venturing into biology. Physics in Perspective, 17, 236–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kay, L. E. (2000). Who wrote the book of life? A history of the genetic code. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kastenhofer, K. (2013). Two sides of the same coin? The (techno)epistemic cultures of systems and synthetic biology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 44, 130–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kell, D. B., & Oliver, S. G. (2004). Here is the evidence, now what is the hypothesis? The complementary roles of inductive and hypothesis-driven science in the post-genomic era. BioEssays, 26, 99–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (2000). Models of and models for: Theory and practice in contemporary biology. Philosophy of Science, 67, S72–S86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (2002). Making sense of life: Explaining biological development with models, metaphors, and machines. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (2003). Models, simulations and “computer experiments”. In H. Radder (Ed.), The philosophy of scientific experimentation (pp. 198–215). Pittsburgh, PA: Pittsburgh University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (2005a). The century beyond the gene. Journal of Biosciences, 30, 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (2005b). Revisiting “scale-free” networks. BioEssays, 27, 1060–1106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (2007). A clash of two cultures. Nature, 445, 603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (2012a). Genes, genomes, and genomics. Biological Theory, 6, 132–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (2012b). Lexicons, kind-terms, and world changes. Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences, 42, 527–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher, P. (1982). Genes. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 33, 337–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitano, H. (2002). Looking beyond the details: A rise in system-oriented approaches in genetics and molecular biology. Current Genetics, 41, 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, J. (2002). Physics meets biology: Bridging the culture gap. Nature, 419, 244–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knorr Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S., Heilbron, J. L., Forman, P., & Allen, L. (1967). Sources for history of quantum physics: An inventory and report. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenoir, T. (1997). Instituting science. The cultural production of scientific disciplines. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod, M., & Nersessian, N. J. (2013a). Coupling simulation and experiment: The bimodal strategy in integrative systems biology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 44, 572–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod, M., & Nersessian, N. J. (2013b). Building simulations from the ground up: Modeling and theory in systems biology. Philosophy of Science, 80, 533–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod, M., & Nersessian, N. J. (2014). Strategies for coordinating experimentation and modeling in integrative systems biology. Journal of experimental zoology. Molecular and Developmental Evolution, 322, 230–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod, M., & Nersessian, N. J. (2016). Interdisciplinary problem- solving: Emerging modes in integrative systems biology. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 6, 401–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod, M. (2018). What makes interdisciplinarity difficult? Some consequences of domain specificity in interdisciplinary practice. Synthese, 195, 697–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milo, R., Shen-Orr, S., Itzkovitz, S., Navad, K., Chklovskii, D., & Alon, U. (2002). Network motifs: Simple building blocks of complex networks. Science, 298, 824–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Malley, M., & Dupré, J. (2005). Fundamental issues in systems biology. BioEssays, 27, 1270–1276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Malley, M., & Dupré, J. (2010). Philosophical themes in metagenomics. In D. Marco (Ed.), Metagenomics: Theory, methods and applications (pp. 183–207). Norfolk: Caister Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Malley, M., & Soyer, O. S. (2012). The roles of integration in molecular systems biology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 43, 58–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olby, R. (1974). The path to the double Helix. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouellette, J. (2003). Switching from physics to biology. The Industrial Physicist, 9, 20–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, A., O’Malley, M., Müller-Wille, S., Calvert, J., & Dupré, J. (2007). Disciplinary baptisms: A comparison of the naming stories of genetics, molecular biology, genomics and systems biology. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 29, 5–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowbottom, D. P. (2011). Approximations, idealizations and ‘experiments’ at the physics–biology interface. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 42, 145–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlosshauer, M. (2011). Elegance and enigma: The quantum interviews. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schrödinger, E. (1944). What is life? The physical aspect of the living cell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Segrè, G. (2011). Ordinary geniuses: Max Delbrück, George Gamow, and the origins of genomics and big bang cosmology. New York: Viking-Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stent, G. (1998). Looking for other laws of physics. Journal of Contemporary History, 33, 371–397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winsberg, E. (1999). Sanctioning models: The epistemology of simulation. Science in Context, 12, 275–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wise, M. N. (2004). Growing explanations: Historical perspectives on Recent Science. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wise, M. N. (2007). Science as history. In J. Renn & K. Gavroglu (Eds.), Positioning the history of science. Boston studies in the philosophy of science (pp. 177–183). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wolgemuth, C. W. (2011). Does cell biology need physicists? Physics, 4, 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We appreciate the generous help of the physicists who welcomed the interviewer into their laboratories, gave her their time and taught her about their scientific practices. Our sincere thanks go to all the interviewees and responsibility for any inadequate piece of information remains on us. We also would like to thank the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science (MPIWG) and the Friends of the Centre for History of Physics at the American Institute of Physics (AIP) for financial and structural support for both the conduct of the interviews and the preparation of the article. We also thank the Brazilian agency CAPES (Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel) for funding the entire project, through grants awarded to LMJ for pursuing her PhD studies both in Brazil and abroad (nos. 65825-4 and 876311-9, respectively). CNEH and OFJ received support from the National Council for Scientific and Technological Research (CNPq) through productivity in research grants (nos. 301259/2010-0 and 305772/2013-9, respectively).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Biology, Federal University of Bahia, Campus de Ondina, Rua Barão do Geremoabo, s.n., Ondina, Salvador, BA, 40170-290, Brazil

    Leyla Mariane Joaquim

  2. Institute of Physics, Federal University of Bahia, Campus de Ondina, Rua Barão do Geremoabo, s.n., Ondina, Salvador, BA, 40210-340, Brazil

    Olival Freire Jr

  3. Institute of Biology, National Institute of Science & Technology in Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Studies in Ecology and Evolution (INCT IN-TREE), Federal University of Bahia, Campus de Ondina, Rua Barão do Geremoabo, s.n., Ondina, Salvador, BA, 40170-290, Brazil

    Charbel N. El-Hani

Authors
  1. Leyla Mariane Joaquim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Olival Freire Jr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Charbel N. El-Hani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leyla Mariane Joaquim.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Joaquim, L.M., Jr, O.F. & El-Hani, C.N. From physics to biology: physicists in the search for systemic biological explanations. Euro Jnl Phil Sci 9, 30 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-019-0254-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-019-0254-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation