@TuomasPernu For a glimpse, I recommend this paper by @NicholsonHPBio & R. Gawne: https://t.co/Pfxs475g2m But it must be said that these communities of philosophically-inclined biologists & philosophers interested in bio have been studied by an inc
@tatianapopo Having said that, I need to point out that the organicists already postulated ideas long these lines in the 1920/30s. So few developmental biologists are aware today of their amazing work. Check out this fabulous paper, if interested: https://
@carl_b_sachs Dan Nicholson and Richard Gawne have a paper on early philosophy of biology that might be helpful reading: https://t.co/Dijfqvfxfy
@philipcball As a philosopher of biology I agree with that, of course, though I disagree that biology was not subjected to insightful philosophical examinations before Mayr and others began writing on the subject in the 1960s. It's a myth I've tried to bus
@Vane_Barone Also: the organicist movement (which was prominent in biology in the 1920/30s) was built on complex notions about the organisation of living systems. See @NicholsonHPBio & Gawne’s excellent paper https://t.co/mxXBhciiYi, for example.
I can't get through the title 'Neither logical empiricism nor vitalism, but organicism: what the philosophy of biology was". Wow. And youi can't understand what it means that genes make organisms? https://t.co/XNvRsTQ5pH