Abstract
Mae-Wan Ho (1988) pointed out that it is a particular problem of contemporary biology that it destroys the “Unity of Nature” by looking through the “Neo-Darwinian looking glass”. The “Unity of Nature” was, and is, a fact of immediate experience for many civilizations past and present. The history of science indicates, however, that science “is concerned with separating and reducing this unity into ever smaller and smaller fragments of which nature somehow must be glued together.” Ho continues: It is a history, not only of fragmentation, but of our own alienation from nature.“ Not only the inorganic world has become reduced to mechanisms and atoms, but the organic world as well. In this process it is “Neo-Darwinism which dealt the final blow in disintegrating the organism to a mere collection of particles (genes) shuffled by blind selective ‘forces’.” The result is that “....humanity [is left] to the dilemma of a disembodied and hence impotent mind pitched against the mindless automation of a body controlled by genes whose sole imperative is to replicate.” In opposition to this approach, Ho demands that we return to a rival tradition “that resolutely resists fragmentation in favour of integration and process.” Because: “once we begin to see biology again in the light of nature’s unity, mind and body will become reunited through processes embracing every level from the sociocultural to the molecular. The organism itself — its functions, volitions and actions — will then be rightly perceived, not as the sole consequence of natural selection, but as a focus of being immanent to process and emerging simultaneously with it.” (Ho 1988, p. 117f.). The organism becomes relocated within nature.
For numerous discussions and support I want to thank Prof. Dr. Michael Drieschner, Norbert Held and Romy Tajon. In addition, I am very obliged to Dr. Barbara Alexius for her help in proof-reading the English version of my manuscript.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Amundson, R.: “Two Concepts of Constraint: Adaptationism and the Challenge from Developmental Biology”, Philosophy of Science,61 (1994), pp. 556578.
Aristoteles: ’Metaphysik Z’. Text, translation and commentary by M. Frede/G. Patzig, München (C.H. Beck) 1988.
Bowler, P.J.: The Mendelian Revolution. The Emergence of Hereditary Concepts in Modern Science and Society,London (The Athlone Press) 1989.
Boyd, A.: “Plant Switches on Genes in Response to Touch”, New Scientist,28 (1990), p. 40.
Brunner, H.G. et al. (1993a): “Abnormal Behavior Associated with a Point Mutation in the Structural Gene for Monoamino Oxidase A”, Science,262 (1993a), pp. 578–580.
Brunner, H.G. et al. (1993b): “X - linked Borderline Mental Retardation with Prominent Behavioral Disturbance: Phenotype, Genetic Localization, and Evidence for disturbed Monoamino Metabolism”, American Journal of Human Genetics,52 (1993b), pp. 1032–1039.
Burian, R. M.: “On Conceptual Change in Biology: The Case of the Gene”, in: D.J. Depew, B.H. Weber (Eds.): Evolution at a Crossroads,Cambridge, Mass./ London (MIT Press) 21986, pp. 21–42.
Carlson, E. A.: “Defining the Gene: An Evolving Concept”, American Journal of Human Genetics,49 (1991), pp. 475–487.
Daly, M.: “Contentious Genes: A Commentary on The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins”, Journal of Social Biological Structure,3 (1980), pp. 77–81.
Falk, R.: “The Gene in Search of an Identity”, Human Genetics,68 (1984), pp. 195–204.
Falk, R.: “The Dominance of Traits in Genetic Analysis”, Journal of the History of Biology,24 (1991), pp. 457–484.
Fogle, T.: “Are Genes Units of Inheritance?”, Biology and Philosophy,5 (1990), pp. 349–371.
Goodwin, B.: How the Leopard Changed its Spots. The Evolution of Complexity,New York et al. (Charles Scribner s Sons) 1994.
Gray, R.: “Death Of the Gene: Developmental Systems Strike Back”, in: P. GRIFFITHS (Ed.): Trees of Life,Dordrecht/Boston/London (Kluwer) 1992, pp. 165209.
Griffiths, P. E., Gray, R. D.: “Developmental Systems And Evolutionary Explanations”, The Journal of Philosophy,91 (1994), pp. 277–304.
Hampson, R.K., Rottman, F.M.: “Alternative Processing of Bovine Growth Hormone mRNA: Nonsplicing of the Final Intron Predicts a High Molecular Weight Variant of Bovine Growth Hormone”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science,84 (1987), pp. 2673–2677.
Hanson, M. R.: “Protein Products of Incompletely Edited Transcripts Are Detected in Plant Mitochiondria”, The Plant Cell,8 (1996), pp. 1–3.
Hanson, M., Sutton, C. A., Lu, B.: “Plant Organelle Gene Expression: Altered by RNA Editing”, Trends in Plant Science,1 (1996), pp. 57–64.
Herbert, A.: “RNA editing, Introns and Evolution”, TIG - Trends in Genetics,12 (1996), pp. 6–8.
Ho, M.-W.: On not Holding Nature Still: Evolution by Process, not by Consequence“, in: M.-W. Ho, S. W. Fox (Eds.): Evolutionary Processes and Metaphors, Chichester et al. (Wiley) 1988, pp. 117–144.
Ho, M.-W., Fox, S. W.: “Processes and Metaphors in Evolution”, in: M.-W. Ho, S. W. Fox (Eds.): Evolutionary Processes and Metaphors, Chichester et al. (Wiley) 1988, pp. 1–16.
Kitcher, P.: “Genes”, British Journal of Philosophy of Science,33 (1982), pp. 337–359.
Kitcher, P.: “Gene: Current Usages”, in: E. Fox Keller, E.A. Lloyd (Eds.): Keywords in Evolutionary Biology,Cambridge, Mass./London (Harvard Univ. Press) 1992, pp. 128–131.
Knippers, R.: Molekulare Genetik,Stuttgart, New York (Thieme)71997.
Lee, W., Haslinger, A., Karin, M., Tijan, R.: “Activation of Transcription by Two Factors That Bind Promoter and Enhancer Sequences of the Human Metallothionein Gene and SV40”, Nature,325 (1987), pp. 368–372.
Levin, B.: Genes,New York et. al. (Wiley) 1985.
Levis, R., Hazelrigg, T., Rubin, G.M.: “Effects of Genomic Position on the Expression of Transduced Copies of White Gene of Drosophila”, Science,229 (1985), pp. 558–561.
Lewontin, R.: Biology as Ideology: The Doctrine of DNA,New York (Harper Collins) 1993.
Mccain, R. A.: “Critical Reflections on Sociobiology”, Review of Social Economy,38 (1980), pp. 123–139.
Neumann-Held, E. M.: “Die moderne Biologie auf der Suche nach dem ‘Heiligen Gral” [“Modern Biology in Seach for the Holy Grail”], in: T. Fischer, R. Seising (Eds.): Wissenschaft und ôffentlichkeit [Science and the Public],Frankfurt/M. (Peter Lang) 1996, pp. 137–163.
Neumann-Held, E. M.: “ ‘Gene’ können nicht alles erklären”, Universitas,52 (1997), pp. 469–479.
Oyama, S.: The Ontogeny of Information. Developmental Systems and Evolution,Cambridge et. al. (Cambridge University Press) 1985.
Oyama, S.: “Evolutionary and Developmental Formation: Politics of the Boundary”, in this book pp. 79–104.
Phreaner, C. G., Williams, M. A., Mulligan, R. M.: “Incomplete Editing of rps12 Transcripts Results in the Synthesis of Polymorphic Polypeptides in Plant Mitochondria”, The Plant Cell,8 (1996), pp. 107–117.
Pollard, J. W.: New Genetic Mechanisms and their Implications for the Formation of New Species“, in: M.-W. Ho, S. W. Fox (Eds.): Evolutionary Processes and Metaphors,Chichester et al. (Wiley) 1988, pp. 63–84.
Portin, P.: “The Concept of the Gene: Short History and Present Status”, The Quarterly Review of Biology,68 (1993), pp. 173–223.
Rehmann-Sutter, C.: “Was ist ein Lebewesen? - Zur philosophischen Herausforderung durch die Molekularbiologie” (“What is a Living Being? - Toward the philosophical challenge of molecular biology], Scheidewege: Jahresschrift für skeptisches Denken,23 (1993/1994), pp. 142–159.
Sterelny, K., Kitcher, P.: “The Return of the Gene”, The Journal of Philosophy,85 (1988), pp. 339–361.
Waters, C. K.: “Genes made Molecular”, Philosophy of Science,61 (1994), pp. 163–185.
Watson, J. D., Crick, F. H.C. (1953a): “Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids: a Structure for Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid”, Nature,171 (1953a), pp. 737–738.
Watson, J. D., Crick, F. H.C. (1953b): “Genetical Implications of the Structure of Deoxyribonucleic Acid”, Nature,171 (1953b), pp. 964–967.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1999 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Neumann-Held, E.M. (1999). The Gene Is Dead — Long Live the Gene! Conceptualizing Genes the Constructionist Way. In: Koslowski, P. (eds) Sociobiology and Bioeconomics. Studies in Economic Ethics and Philosophy. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-03825-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-03825-3_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-08470-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-03825-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive