Biology and Philosophy

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 319–347 | Cite as

Theory structure, reduction, and disciplinary integration in biology

  • Kenneth F. Schaffner
Article

Abstract

This paper examines the nature of theory structure in biology and considers the implications of those theoretical structures for theory reduction. An account of biological “theories” as interlevel prototypes embodying causal sequences, and related to each other by strong analogies, is presented, and examples from the neurosciences are provided to illustrate these “middle-range” theories. I then go on to discuss several modifications of Nagel's classical model of theory reduction, and indicate at what stages in the development of reductions these models might best apply. Finally I consider several implications of these analyses of theory structure and reduction for disciplinary integration in biology.

Key words

Theory structure reduction integration neuroscience Aplysia parallel processing explanation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams, E.: 1959, ‘The Foundations of Rigid Body Mechanics and the Derivation of its Laws from Those of Particle Mechanics’, in L. Henkin, P. Suppes and A. Tarski (eds.),The Axiomatic Method, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 250–265.Google Scholar
  2. Beatty, J.: 1981, ‘What's Wrong with the Received View of Evolutionary Theory?’ In P.D. Asquith and R.N. Giere (eds.),PSA-1980, Vol 2, Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, MI, pp. 397–439.Google Scholar
  3. Beatty, J.: 1987, ‘On Behalf of the Samantic View’,Biology and Philosophy 2, 17–23.Google Scholar
  4. Beatty, J.: 1991, ‘The Evolutionary Contingency Thesis (And Its Role as a Unifying Principle in Philosophy of Biology’ (draft manuscript).Google Scholar
  5. Bechtel, W.: 1986, ‘Biochemistry: A Cross Disciplinary Endeavor that Discovered a Distinctive Domain’, in W. Bechtel (ed.),Integrating Scientific Disciplines, Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, pp. 77–100.Google Scholar
  6. Bechtel, W.: 1993, ‘Integrating Sciences by Creating New Disciplines’,this volume.Google Scholar
  7. Benzer, S.: 1956, ‘The Elementary Units of Heredity’, in W.D. McElroy and B. Glass (eds.),A Symposium on the Chemical Basis of Heredity, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp. 70–93.Google Scholar
  8. Brush, S.G.: 1966, ‘Kinetic Theory I and II, Pergamon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  9. Burian, R.: 1993, ‘Unification and Coherence as Methodological Objectives in the Biological Sciences’,this volume.Google Scholar
  10. Causey, R.: 1977,Unity of Science, Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  11. Churchland, Patricia Smith: 1986,Neurophilosophy, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  12. Churchland, Patricia Smith: 1988, ‘The Significance of Neuroscience for Philosophy’,Trends in Neurosciences 11, 304–306.Google Scholar
  13. Churchland, Paul: 1979,Scientific Realism and the Plasticity of Mind, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Churchland, Paul: 1981, ‘Eliminative Materialism and the Propositional Attitudes’,Journal of Philosophy 78, 67–90.Google Scholar
  15. Churchland, Paul: 1984,Matter and Consciousness: A Contemporary Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  16. Culp, S. and P. Kitcher: 1989, ‘Theory Structure and Theory Change in Contemporary Molecular Biology’,British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 40, 459–483.Google Scholar
  17. Darden, L. and N. Maull: 1977, ‘Interfield Theories’,Philosophy of Science 44, 43–64.Google Scholar
  18. Feyerabend, P.K.: 1962, ‘Explanation, Reduction, and Empiricism’, in H. Feigl and G. Maxwell (eds.),Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 3. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp. 28–97.Google Scholar
  19. Frost, W.N., G.A. Clark, and E.R. Kandel: 1988, ‘Parallel Processing of Short-term Memory for Sensitization’ inAplysia, Journal of Neurobiology 19, 297–334.Google Scholar
  20. Genesereth, M. and N. Nilsson: 1987,Logical Foundations of Artificial Intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA.Google Scholar
  21. Ginsberg, M.: 1987,Readings in Nonmotonic Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA.Google Scholar
  22. Hempel, C.G.: 1965,Aspects of Scientific Explanation, Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Hooker, C.: 1981, ‘Towards a General Theory of Reduction. Part I: Historical and Scientific Setting. Part II: Identity in Reduction. Part III: Cross-categorical Reduction.’Dialogue 20, 38–59, 201–236, 496–529.Google Scholar
  24. Hull, D.: 1974,Philosophy of Biological Science, Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  25. Hull, D.: 1976, ‘Informal Aspects of Theory Reduction’, in R.S. Cohen et al., (eds.)PSA-1974, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 653–670.Google Scholar
  26. Hull, D.: 1981, ‘Reduction and Genetics,’The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 6, 125–143.Google Scholar
  27. Jacquard, A.: 1974,The Genetic Structure of Populations, Springer-Verlag, New York.Google Scholar
  28. Kandel, E.: 1979, ‘Small Systems of Neurons’,Scientific American (September 1979).Google Scholar
  29. Kandel, E.: 1987, ‘Preface’ in Kandel, E. (ed.),Molecular Neurobiology in Neurology and Psychiatry. Raven Press, New York, pp. vii-ix.Google Scholar
  30. Kandel, E.: 1988, Report on ‘Cell and Molecular Biological Studies of Learning’, inResearch in Progress — 1988. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Bethesda, MD, pp. 165+167.Google Scholar
  31. Kandel, E., V. Castellucci, P. Goelet, and S. Schacher: 1987, in E. Kandel (ed.),Molecular Neurobiology in Neurology and Psychiatry, Raven Press, New York, pp. 111–132.Google Scholar
  32. Kandel, E. and J. Schwartz (eds.): 1985,Principles of Neural Sciences, 2nd ed., New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  33. Kandel, E., J. Schwartz, and T. Jessell (eds.): 1991,Principles of Neural Science, 3rd ed., New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  34. Kitcher, P.: 1984, ‘1953 and all that: A tale of two sciences’,Philosophical Review 93, 335–373.Google Scholar
  35. Kitcher, P.: 1989, ‘Explanatory Unification and the Causal Structure of the World’, in P. Kitcher and W.C. Salmon (eds.),Scientific Explanation, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp. 410–505.Google Scholar
  36. Kuffler, S., J. Nichols, and A. Martin: 1984,From Neuron to Brain, 2nd ed., Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.Google Scholar
  37. Kuhn, T.: 1962, 1970,The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  38. Lewin, B.: 1990,Genes IV, Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  39. Lloyd, E.: 1988,The Structure and Confirmation of Evolutionary Theory, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  40. Mackie, J.: 1974,The Cement of the Universe, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  41. Mackey, S., D. Glanzman, S. Small, A. Dyke, E. Kandel, and R. Hawkins: 1987 ‘Tail Shock produces inhibition as well as sensitization of the siphon-withdrawal reflex ofAplysia: Possible behavioral role for presynaptic inhibition mediated by the peptide Phe-Met-Arg-Phe-NH2’,Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A. 84, 8730–8734.Google Scholar
  42. Mayr, E.: 1982,The Growth of Biological Thought, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Morowitz, H.: 1985,Models for Biomedical Research: A New Perspective. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences Press.Google Scholar
  44. Nagel, E.: 1949, ‘The Meaning of Reduction in the Natural Sciences’, in R. Stauffer (ed.),Science and Civilization, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
  45. Nagel, E.: 1961,The Structure of Science, Harcourt, Brace, and World, New York.Google Scholar
  46. Popper, K.: 1957, ‘The Aim of Science’,Ratio 1, 24–35.Google Scholar
  47. Rosenberg, A.: 1985,The Structure of Biological Science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  48. Ruse, M.: 1973,Philosophy of Biology, Hutchinson, London.Google Scholar
  49. Ruse, M.: 1976, ‘Reduction in Genetics’, in R.S. Cohenet al. (eds.),PSA-1974, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 653–670.Google Scholar
  50. Salmon, W.C.: 1989, ‘Four Decades of Scientific Explanation’, in P. Kitcher and W.C. Salmon (eds.),Scientific Explanation, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp. 3–219.Google Scholar
  51. Sarkar, S.: 1989, ‘Reductionism and Molecular Biology: A Reappraisal’, Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago.Google Scholar
  52. Sarkar, S.: 1991, ‘Models of Reduction and Categories of Reductionism’,Synthese (in press).Google Scholar
  53. Schaffner, K.: 1967, ‘Approaches to Reduction’,Philosophy of Science 34, 137–147.Google Scholar
  54. Schaffner, K.: 1969, ‘Correspondence Rules’,Philosophy of Science 36, 280–290.Google Scholar
  55. Schaffner, K.: 1972,Nineteenth-Century Aether Theories, Pergamon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  56. Schaffner, K.: 1976, ‘Reduction in the Biomedical Sciences: Problems and Prospects’, in R. Cohenet al. (eds.),PSA-1974, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 613–632.Google Scholar
  57. Schaffner, K.: 1977, ‘Reduction, Reductionism, Values, and Progress in the Biomedical Sciences’, in R. Colodny (eds.),Logic, Laws, and Life, Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 143–171.Google Scholar
  58. Schaffner, K.: 1980, ‘Theory Structure in the Biomedical Sciences’,Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 5, 57–97.Google Scholar
  59. Schaffner, K.: 1986, ‘Exemplar Reasoning about Biological Models and Diseases: A Relation between the Philosophy of Medicine and Philosophy of Science’,Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 11, 63–80.Google Scholar
  60. Schaffner, K.: 1988, ‘Computerized Implementation of Biomedical Theory Structures: An Artificial Intelligence Approach’, in A. Fine, A. Machamer and P. Machamer (eds.),PSA-1986, Vol. 2, Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, MI, pp. 17–32.Google Scholar
  61. Schaffner, K.: 1992a, ‘Philosophy of Medicine’, in J. Earmanet al., Philosophy of Science: An Introduction, Prentice-Hall, Englewood-Cliffs, NJ, in press.Google Scholar
  62. Schaffner, K.: 1992b,Discovery and Explanation in Biology and Medicine, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, in press.Google Scholar
  63. Shapere, D.: 1974, ‘Scientific Theories and Their Domains’, in F. Suppe (ed.): 1974, 1977, pp. 518–565.Google Scholar
  64. Sklar, L.: 1967, ‘Types of Inter-Theoretic Reduction’,British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 18, 109–120.Google Scholar
  65. Smart, J.J.C.: 1963,Philosophy and Scientific Realism, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
  66. Sober, E. (ed.): 1984,Conceptual Issues in Evolutionary Biology, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  67. Steen, van der W.J.: 1993, ‘Towards Disciplinary Disintegration in Biology’,this volume.Google Scholar
  68. Steen, van der W.J., and H. Kamminga: 1991, ‘Laws and Natural History in Biology’,British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, in press.Google Scholar
  69. Suppe, F.: 1974, 1977,The Structure of Scientific Theories, 2nd ed., University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL.Google Scholar
  70. Suppes, P.: 1957,Introduction to Logic, Van Nostrand, New York.Google Scholar
  71. Suppes, P.: n.d. [1964], ‘What is a Scientific Theory’, A Forum Lecture Delivered on the Voice of America. Republished in S. Morgenbesser (ed.): 1967,Philosophy of Science Today, Basic Books, New York, pp. 000–000.Google Scholar
  72. Watson, J.D.et al.: 1987,Molecular Biology of the Gene, 4th ed., 2 vols. Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo Park, CA.Google Scholar
  73. Williams, M.: 1970, ‘Deducing the Consequences of Evolution: A Mathematical Model’,Journal of Theoretical Biology 29, 383–385.Google Scholar
  74. Wimsatt, W.: 1976a, ‘Reductive Explanation: A Functional Account’, in R.S. Cohenet al. (ed.),PSA-1974, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 671–710.Google Scholar
  75. Wimsatt, W.: 1976b, ‘Reductionism, Levels of Organization, and the Mind-Body Problem’, in G. Globus, G. Maxwell and I. Savodnik (eds.),Consciousness and the Brain: A Scientific and Philosophical Inquiry, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 199–267.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kenneth F. Schaffner
    • 1
  1. 1.714 T. Gelman LibraryGeorge Washington UniversityWashington, D.C.USA

Personalised recommendations