Genocentryzm versus teoria systemów rozwojowych. Dwa konkurencyjne sposoby rozumienia informacji w biologii współczesnej

Radosław Siedliński
{"title":"Genocentryzm versus teoria systemów rozwojowych. Dwa konkurencyjne sposoby rozumienia informacji w biologii współczesnej","authors":"Radosław Siedliński","doi":"10.15633/ss.2485","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are (at least) two opposing concepts of biological information, or bioinformation, discussed in the modern philosophy of biology: genocentric (genebased) and holistic. As a main proponent of the former I consider British evolutionist John Maynard Smith and his teleosemantic theory of bioinformation. The latter was proposed by American philosopher Susan Oyama in the form of so-called Developmental Systems Theory (DST). In Maynard Smith proposal bioinformation is strictly gene-based and any non-genetic element of a living organism cannot be considered as a vehicle of informational content. Such information is transmitted from parents to offspring inside the germ cells and every time serves as a blueprint for building the whole organisms. DST claims the opposite: bioinformation cannot be reduced to genetic elements only and is scattered throughout the whole living system. What is more, biological information is not simply transmitted between generations but every time rebuilt from available developmental resources: bioinformation has not only it is phylogeny, but it is ontogeny as well. The aim of this paper is twofold. First: to present the foundations of both aforementioned theories to the reader and second: to discuss the different objections raised against them.","PeriodicalId":30875,"journal":{"name":"Semina Scientiarum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Semina Scientiarum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15633/ss.2485","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

There are (at least) two opposing concepts of biological information, or bioinformation, discussed in the modern philosophy of biology: genocentric (genebased) and holistic. As a main proponent of the former I consider British evolutionist John Maynard Smith and his teleosemantic theory of bioinformation. The latter was proposed by American philosopher Susan Oyama in the form of so-called Developmental Systems Theory (DST). In Maynard Smith proposal bioinformation is strictly gene-based and any non-genetic element of a living organism cannot be considered as a vehicle of informational content. Such information is transmitted from parents to offspring inside the germ cells and every time serves as a blueprint for building the whole organisms. DST claims the opposite: bioinformation cannot be reduced to genetic elements only and is scattered throughout the whole living system. What is more, biological information is not simply transmitted between generations but every time rebuilt from available developmental resources: bioinformation has not only it is phylogeny, but it is ontogeny as well. The aim of this paper is twofold. First: to present the foundations of both aforementioned theories to the reader and second: to discuss the different objections raised against them.
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
在现代生物学哲学中,有(至少)两个相反的生物信息或生物信息概念:种族灭绝(基于基因)和整体。作为前者的主要支持者,我认为英国进化论者约翰·梅纳德·史密斯和他的生物信息的目的论。后者是由美国哲学家大山苏珊以所谓的发展系统理论(DST)的形式提出的。在梅纳德·史密斯的提议中,生物信息严格地以基因为基础,任何生物体的非遗传元素都不能被视为信息内容的载体。这些信息在生殖细胞内从父母传递给后代,每次都作为构建整个生物体的蓝图。DST则持相反的观点:生物信息不能仅仅归结为遗传元素,而是分散在整个生命系统中。更重要的是,生物信息不是简单地在世代之间传递,而是每次都从现有的发育资源中重建:生物信息不仅具有系统发生性,而且具有个体发生性。本文的目的是双重的。首先,向读者介绍上述两种理论的基础,其次,讨论对它们提出的不同反对意见。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Paradygmat obiektowy w oprogramowaniu astronomicznym Człowiek jako wytwór siebie samego. Lem, transhumanizm i dwie koncepcje autentyczności Oświeceniowa wizja nauki w ujęciu Józefa Sołtykowicza, jako przykład refleksji filozoficznej z kręgu Towarzystwa Naukowego Krakowskiego Krytyka Platona przyjmowania uczestniczenia (ei;dh) rzeczy w postaciach () jako przyczynek do dyskusji na temat źródeł antynomii w podstawach matematyki Wyjątkowy status człowieka w przyrodzie? Nauki ewolucyjne a chrześcijańska antropologia
×
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