Sperm-Force: Naturphilosophie and George Newport's Quest to Discover the Secret of Fertilization.

IF 0.7 1区 哲学 Q4 BIOLOGY Journal of the History of Biology Pub Date : 2022-12-01 DOI:10.1007/s10739-022-09696-3
Jennifer Coggon
{"title":"Sperm-Force: Naturphilosophie and George Newport's Quest to Discover the Secret of Fertilization.","authors":"Jennifer Coggon","doi":"10.1007/s10739-022-09696-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper analyses the forgotten concept of \"sperm-force\" proposed by George Newport (1803-1854). Newport is known for his comprehensive microscopic examinations of sperm and egg interaction in amphibian fertilization between 1850 and 1854. My work with archival sources reveals that Newport believed fertilization was caused by sperm-force, which the Royal Society refused to publish. My reconstruction chronologically traces the philosophical and experimental origins of sperm-force to Newport's 1830s entomological work. Sperm-force is a remnant of Newport's speculations on the creation of the active individual. I argue that sperm-force was rooted in British interpretations of German Naturphilosophie, which demonstrates Continental influences on mid-Victorian embryology, particularly the role of male generative power. This context provides further evidence that British versions of Romantic science fostered sophisticated experimental work. The refusal by Paleyite stalwarts of natural theology to publish Newport's ideas illustrates the institutional resistance to German pantheistic and vitalistic influences. This reconstruction of sperm-force's philosophical foundation and its reception offers new understandings of mid-Victorian attitudes toward the inheritance of mind and body. It situates Newport's work within the nineteenth century's scientific project to assign stereotypical genders to the gametes.</p>","PeriodicalId":51104,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the History of Biology","volume":"55 4","pages":"615-687"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the History of Biology","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-022-09696-3","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper analyses the forgotten concept of "sperm-force" proposed by George Newport (1803-1854). Newport is known for his comprehensive microscopic examinations of sperm and egg interaction in amphibian fertilization between 1850 and 1854. My work with archival sources reveals that Newport believed fertilization was caused by sperm-force, which the Royal Society refused to publish. My reconstruction chronologically traces the philosophical and experimental origins of sperm-force to Newport's 1830s entomological work. Sperm-force is a remnant of Newport's speculations on the creation of the active individual. I argue that sperm-force was rooted in British interpretations of German Naturphilosophie, which demonstrates Continental influences on mid-Victorian embryology, particularly the role of male generative power. This context provides further evidence that British versions of Romantic science fostered sophisticated experimental work. The refusal by Paleyite stalwarts of natural theology to publish Newport's ideas illustrates the institutional resistance to German pantheistic and vitalistic influences. This reconstruction of sperm-force's philosophical foundation and its reception offers new understandings of mid-Victorian attitudes toward the inheritance of mind and body. It situates Newport's work within the nineteenth century's scientific project to assign stereotypical genders to the gametes.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
精子力量:自然哲学和乔治·纽波特探索受精的秘密。
本文分析了乔治·纽波特(1803-1854)提出的被遗忘的“精子力”概念。纽波特以对1850年至1854年间两栖动物受精过程中精子和卵子相互作用的全面显微检查而闻名。我对档案资料的研究表明,纽波特认为受精是由精子力量引起的,但英国皇家学会拒绝发表这一观点。我的重构按照时间顺序追溯了精子力的哲学和实验起源,追溯到纽波特19世纪30年代的昆虫学研究。精子力量是纽波特关于创造活跃个体的推测的残余。我认为精子力量根植于英国对德国自然哲学的解释,这证明了大陆对维多利亚中期胚胎学的影响,特别是男性生育能力的作用。这一背景进一步证明,英国版本的浪漫主义科学促进了复杂的实验工作。Paleyite自然神学的忠实拥护者拒绝发表纽波特的观点,说明了对德国泛神论和活力论影响的制度性抵制。这种对精子力的哲学基础及其接受的重建提供了对维多利亚中期对身心继承的态度的新理解。它将纽波特的工作置于19世纪为配子分配刻板性别的科学项目中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the History of Biology
Journal of the History of Biology 生物-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
12.50%
发文量
29
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the History of Biology is devoted to the history of the life sciences, with additional interest and concern in philosophical and social issues confronting biology in its varying historical contexts. While all historical epochs are welcome, particular attention has been paid in recent years to developments during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. JHB is a recognized forum for scholarship on Darwin, but pieces that connect Darwinism with broader social and intellectual issues in the life sciences are especially encouraged. The journal serves both the working biologist who needs a full understanding of the historical and philosophical bases of the field and the historian of biology interested in following developments and making historiographical connections with the history of science.
期刊最新文献
Alfred Russel Wallace's Darwinian Opposition to Eugenics. A Biogeographical Debate at the Origins of Limnology in Switzerland and Italy: The Issue over Pelagic Fauna Between Pietro Pavesi and François-Alphonse Forel. Hey Hey We’re the Monkeys! An Essay Review of Gowan Dawson’s Monkey to Man "Pray Observe How Time Slips By:" Collaborators, Assistants, and the Background Dynamics in the Publication of Darwin's Cirripedia Project. "The Logic of Monsters:" Pere Alberch and the Evolutionary Significance of Experimental Teratology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1