Advertisement

Genetics, Life and Death

Genetics as providing a definition of life and death
  • Michel Morange
Part of the Logic, Epistemology, and The Unity of Science book series (LEUS, volume 6)

Abstract

There were two different and partially successive attempts of geneticists to associate genes with a definition of life. The first has its origin in the theoretical considerations elaborated at the end of the 19th century by biologists such as Hugo de Vries and August Weismann, looking for the molecular bases of biological processes and the mechanisms of their reproduction. It reached its most elaborate form in Hermann Muller’s contributions, and pervaded genetics during the first part of the century. The second was the paradoxical result of the program of gene reification endorsed by molecular biologists, which progressively ruined the previous ambitions. This gave way to a less naive vision of the relation between genes and the definition of life, focused no longer on the materialistic description of the gene, but on its power to control the adaptation of organisms to their environment.

It is interesting that the link between life and death that has remained a constant of philosophical investigations from Aristotle to Bichat has kept its place in this genetic approach to life. Definitions of life by both the molecular and population genetics have tried – with less success for the former – to justify the place of death in the economy of nature. Models, derived from genetics, are now used to describe the transmission of behaviors and beliefs between humans. They give genetic models a strong visibility in contemporary thinking

Keywords

Natural Selection Genetic Program Molecular Biologist Antagonistic Pleiotropism Materialistic Description 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adami C (1998) Introduction to artificial life. Springer-Verlag, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen GE (2000) The reception of Mendelism in the United States, 1900–1930. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Sciences de la vie 323:1081–1088Google Scholar
  3. Allen GE (2003) Mendel and modern genetics: the legacy for today. Endeavour 27:63–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buller DJ (2005) Adapting minds: evolutionary psychology and the persistent quest for human nature. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  5. Burian RM, Gayon J (1999) The French school of genetics: from physiological and population genetics to regulatory molecular genetics. Annu Rev Genet 33:313–349 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Canguilhem G (1968) La nouvelle connaissance de la vie: le concept et la vie inEtudes d’histoire et de philosophie des sciences, Vrin, Paris pp 335–364Google Scholar
  7. Castle WE (1919) Piebald rats and the theory of genes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 5:126–130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cohen HY, Miller C, Bitterman KJ et al. (2004) Calorie restriction promotes mammalian cell survival by inducing the SIRT1 deacetylase. Science 305:390–392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dawkins R (1976) The selfish gene. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Gayon J (2004) La génétique est-elle encore une discipline? Med/Sci 20:248–253Google Scholar
  11. Gonzalez BM (1923) Experimental studies on the duration of life: VIII. The influence upon duration of life of certain mutant genes of Drosophila melanogaster. Am Natur 62:289–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Guarente L (2003) Ageless quest: one scientist’s search for genes that prolong youth, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NYGoogle Scholar
  13. Jacob F (1970) La logique du vivant, Paris, Gallimard. Trans (1974) The logic of life, Princeton Scientific Library, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  14. Jacob F (1981) Le jeu des possibles, Paris, Fayard. Trans (1982) The possible and the actual, University of Washington Press, Seattle, WAGoogle Scholar
  15. Kamminga H (1988) Historical perspective: the problem of the origin of life in the context of developments in biology. Orig Life Evol Biosph 18:1–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kang K, Morange M (2001) Succès et limites de l’étude moléculaire de la mort cellulaire programmée. Annal. d’Hist. du Vivant 4:159–175Google Scholar
  17. Kirkwood TBL,Rose MR (1991) Evolution of senescence: late survival sacrificed for reproduction. Phil Trans Roy Soc Lond $B$ 332:15–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Klarsfeld A, Revah F (2000) Biologie de la mort. Odile Jacob, ParisGoogle Scholar
  19. Korfiatis KJ, Stamou GP (1994) Emergence of new fields in ecology: the case of life history studies. Hist Phil Life Sci 16:97–116Google Scholar
  20. Kujoth GC, Hiona A, Pugh TD et al. (2005) Mitochondrial DNA mutations, oxidative stress, and apoptosis in mammalian aging. Science 309:481–484PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lewontin RC (1970) The units of selection. Annu Rev Ecol System 1:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lockshin RA, Williams CM (1964) Programmed cell death – II. Endocrine potentiation of the breakdown of the intersegmental muscles of silkmoths. J Insect Physiol 10:643–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lockshin RA, Williams CM (1965) Programmed cell death – I. Cytology of degeneration in the intersegmental muscles of the Pernyi silkmoth. J Insect Physiol 11:123–133PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Machery E (2005) Why I stopped worrying about defining life ... and why you should as well, privileged communicationGoogle Scholar
  25. Manoli CM, Foss M, Villella A et al. (2005) Male-specific fruitless specifies the neural substrates of Drosophila courtship behavior. Nature 436:395–400PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Medawar PB (1952) An unsolved problem of biology. H. K. Lewis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Monod J (1970) Le hasard et la nécessité, Paris, Le Seuil. Trans (1972) Chance and necessity, Vintage books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Morange M (2004) La génétique: une science aux caractéristiques très particulières. Bull Hist Epistém Sci Vie 11:235–247Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Muller HJ (1927) Artificial transmutation of the gene. Science 66:84–87PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    Muller HJ (1929) The gene as the basis of life. Proceedings of the 4th international congress of plant science, Ithaca, I:879–921Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    Olby RC (1966) Origins of Mendelism. Constable, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Olby RC (1974) The path to the double helix. Macmillan, London, Chap 9Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    Olby RC (1979) Mendel no Mendelian. Hist Sci 8:53–72Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    Pearl R, Parker SL, Gonzalez BM (1923) Experimental studies on the duration of life: VII.The Mendelian inheritance of duration of life in crosses of wild type and quintuple stocks of Drosophila melanogaster. Amer Nat 57:153–192Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    Pichot A (1999) Histoire de la notion de gene. Flammarion, ParisGoogle Scholar
  36. [36]
    Ravin AW (1977) The gene as catalyst; the gene as organism. Stud Hist Biol 1:1–45PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. [37]
    Rosenberg A (1994) Instrumental biology or the disunity of science. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  38. [38]
    Shostak S (1998) Death of life: the legacy of molecular biology. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  39. [39]
    Troland LT (1917) Biological enigmas and the theory of enzyme action. Am Natur 51:321–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. [40]
    Williams GC (1957) Pleiotropy, natural selection, and the evolution of senescence. Evolution 11:398–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michel Morange
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre Cavaillés, EnsParisFrance

Personalised recommendations