Explanation in Biology: Reduction, Pluralism, and Explanatory Aims

Brigandt, Ingo

doi:10.1007/s11191-011-9350-7

Cited by 81 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 72 publications

(56 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This may be at odds with philosophers' conceptualization of mechanistic explanation as the explanation of a whole in terms of its physical parts, including the spatial organization of and qualitative interactions among parts. Philosophical accounts of mechanistic explanation have usually been silent about how a mathematical model could contribute to an explanation at all; in fact, causal-mechanistic accounts have been developed as an alternative to traditional models of explanation as derivation from quantitatively formulated laws (Brigandt, 2013a;Craver, 2007). Yet systems biology does appear to explain using equations and quantitative models (Baetu, in press;Fagan, 2012).…”

Section: This Issue)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Philosophical accounts of mechanistic explanation have been developed as an alternative to the traditional idea of scientific explanation as the derivation from laws, e.g., the deductivenomological model (Brigandt, 2013a). In molecular biology and related areas, there are hardly laws, and instead research consists in the discovery of mechanisms, i.e., the breaking of a whole into its concrete structural parts (Bechtel & Richardson, 1993).…”

Section: No Dichotomy Between Mechanistic Explanations and Mathematicmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many contemporary philosophers accept a pluralism about the types of explanation (Brigandt, 2013a). The criticism of the deductive-nomological model did not lead to its replacement by a single model of explanation.…”

Section: Sometimes Such Explanatorily Relevant Features Can Only Be Cmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Current philosophical accounts of integration and integrative explanations can be seen as a philosophical alternative to reduction and reductive explanation (Brigandt, 2013a;Brigandt & Love, 2010, 2012bPlutynski, this issue). By assuming that the knowledge from several fields can be logically deduced from a more fundamental (lower-level) theory, the model of theory reduction proved unable to capture the complex relations among biological ideas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, mechanisms are discovered in a piecemeal fashion, and mechanistic research may alternate between downward, reductive episodes and upward, integrative episodes (Bechtel, 2010, this issue;Craver, 2005). As a result, such philosophical accounts pay attention to discovery and the change of knowledge and research strategies and thereby address not only the product of science (e.g., a finished explanation) but also the practice and dynamic process of science (Brigandt, 2013a(Brigandt, , 2013bGerson, this issue;Griesemer, …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Systems biology and the integration of mechanistic explanation and mathematical explanation

Brigandt

2013

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper discusses how systems biology is working toward complex accounts that integrate explanation in terms of mechanisms and explanation by mathematical models-which some philosophers have viewed as rival models of explanation. Systems biology is an integrative approach, and it strongly relies on mathematical modeling. Philosophical accounts of mechanisms capture integrative in the sense of multilevel and multifield explanations, yet accounts of mechanistic explanation (as the analysis of a whole in terms of its structural parts and their qualitative interactions) have failed to address how a mathematical model could contribute to such explanations. I discuss how mathematical equations can be explanatorily relevant. Several cases from systems biology are discussed to illustrate the interplay between mechanistic research and mathematical modeling, and I point to questions about qualitative phenomena (rather than the explanation of quantitative details), where quantitative models are still indispensable to the explanation. Systems biology shows that a broader philosophical conception of mechanisms is needed, which takes into account functional-dynamical aspects, interaction in complex networks with feedback loops, system-wide functional properties such as distributed functionality and robustness, and a mechanism's ability to respond to perturbations (beyond its actual operation). I offer general conclusions for philosophical accounts of explanation.

show abstract

Section: This Issue)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: No Dichotomy Between Mechanistic Explanations and Mathematicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sometimes Such Explanatorily Relevant Features Can Only Be Cmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Systems biology and the integration of mechanistic explanation and mathematical explanation

Brigandt

2013

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The philosophy of logical practice

Martin¹

2023

Examining Philosophy Itself

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary philosophy of science and philosophy of mathematics are typified by their detailed analysis of the various facets of scientific and mathematical methodology, whether these be the norms of model building within a field of science (Braillard and Malaterre 2015), the notion of rigor that mathematicians adhere to when evaluating proofs (Hamami 2019), or the criteria scientists use when evaluating the utility of theoretical concepts (Brigandt 2010). In all of these cases, there is an acceptance that the philosophy of a research field should primarily be based upon the actual practices of experts within the field, rather than some idealised accounts of them.The general rationale for this practice-based approach is clear, if often left explicitly unsaid (Soler et al. 2014). The sciences and mathematics, like any field of inquiry, are social

show abstract

How Do Preservice Biology Teachers Explain the Origin of Biological Traits?: A Philosophical Analysis

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research suggests that students tend to explain the origin of biological traits in terms of needs or purposes and/or as the direct product of genes, rather than as the outcome of evolutionary and developmental processes. We suggest that in order for students to be able to construct scientific explanations, it is important to clearly and explicitly distinguish between causes that make a difference to the production of effects and the processes through which these effects are produced in developing evolutionary and developmental explanations for the origin of biological traits. However, these distinctions are not usually made in textbooks and curricula, and it is unclear how biology teachers themselves explain the origins of biological traits. In this study, we present the conclusions from the analysis of the explanations that 19 preservice biology teachers gave for the origins of biological traits. The results indicate that they often referred to causes and processes in their evolutionary explanations, but that they did not always do this in their developmental explanations. We suggest that future biology teachers should understand the structure of explanations for the origins of traits to efficiently teach their students to construct such kinds of explanations. C

show abstract

Explanation in Biology: Reduction, Pluralism, and Explanatory Aims

Cited by 81 publications

References 72 publications

Systems biology and the integration of mechanistic explanation and mathematical explanation

Systems biology and the integration of mechanistic explanation and mathematical explanation

The philosophy of logical practice

How Do Preservice Biology Teachers Explain the Origin of Biological Traits?: A Philosophical Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About