Literature DB >> 15791804

Genes: philosophical analyses put to the test.

Karola Stotz1, Paul Griffiths.   

Abstract

This paper describes one complete and one ongoing empirical study in which philosophical analyses of the concept of the gene were operationalized and tested against questionnaire data obtained from working biologists to determine whether and when biologists conceive genes in the ways suggested. These studies throw light on how different gene concepts contribute to biological research. Their aim is not to arrive at one or more correct 'definitions' of the gene, but rather to map out the variation in the gene concept and to explore its causes and its effects.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15791804     DOI: 10.1080/03919710412331341621

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hist Philos Life Sci        ISSN: 0391-9714            Impact factor:   1.205


  5 in total

1.  The sociable gene.

Authors:  Jon Turney
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 8.807

2.  Genes in the postgenomic era.

Authors:  Paul E Griffiths; Karola Stotz
Journal:  Theor Med Bioeth       Date:  2006

3.  Frame that gene. A tool for analysing and classifying the communication of genetics to the public.

Authors:  Rebecca Carver; Ragnar Waldahl; Jarle Breivik
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2008-09-05       Impact factor: 8.807

4.  What are genes "for" or where are traits "from"? What is the question?

Authors:  Anne V Buchanan; Samuel Sholtis; Joan Richtsmeier; Kenneth M Weiss
Journal:  Bioessays       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 4.345

5.  If we are all cultural Darwinians what's the fuss about? Clarifying recent disagreements in the field of cultural evolution.

Authors:  Alberto Acerbi; Alex Mesoudi
Journal:  Biol Philos       Date:  2015-06-03       Impact factor: 1.461

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.