Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:42:36.612Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Series:   Elements in the Philosophy of Biology

The Metaphysics of Biology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2021

John Dupré
John Dupré
Affiliation:
University of Exeter

Summary

This Element is an introduction to the metaphysics of biology, a very general account of the nature of the living world. The first part of the Element addresses more traditionally philosophical questions - whether biological systems are reducible to the properties of their physical parts, causation and laws of nature, substantialist and processualist accounts of life, and the nature of biological kinds. The second half will offer an understanding of important biological entities, drawing on the earlier discussions. This division should not be taken too seriously, however: the topics in both parts are deeply interconnected. Although this does not claim to be a scientific work, it does aim to be firmly grounded in our best scientific knowledge; it is an exercise in naturalistic metaphysics. Its most distinctive feature is that argues throughout for a view of living systems as processes rather than things or, in the technical philosophical sense, substances.
Get access

Keywords

LifeNaturalistic metaphysicsProcess biologyMetaphysics of scienceProcess ontology
Type
Element
Information
Series: Elements in the Philosophy of Biology
Online ISBN: 9781009024297
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 03 June 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Bibliography

Anderson, J. M. 2000. ‘Multinucleated Giant Cells’, Current Opinion in Hematology, 7, 40–7.Google Scholar
Ankeny, R. A. and Leonelli, S. 2011. ‘What’s so Special about Model Organisms’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 42, 313–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, J. L. 1962. Sense and Sensibilia (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Austin, C. J. 2020. ‘Organisms, Activity, and Being: On the Substance of Process Ontology’, European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 10(2), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balch, W. E., Morimoto, R. I., Dillin, A. and Kelly, J. W. 2008. ‘Adapting Proteostasis for Disease Intervention’, Science, 319, 916–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bapteste, E., O’Malley, M. A., Beiko, R. et al. 2009. ‘Prokaryotic Evolution and the Tree of Life are Two Different Things’, Biology Direct, 4, 34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bateson, P. Cartwright, N., Dupré, J., Laland, K. and Noble, D. (eds.) 2017. Special Issue on ‘New Trends in Evolutionary Biology: Biological, Philosophical and Social Science’.Google Scholar
Barker, M. J. 2010. ‘Species Intrinsicalism’, Philosophy of Science, 77, 73–91.Google Scholar
Barnes, B. and Dupré, J. 2008. Genomes and What to Make of Them (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
Beatty, J. 1995. ‘The Evolutionary Contingency Thesis’, in Wolters, G., and Lennox, J. G., (eds.). Concepts, Theories, and Rationality in the Biological Sciences (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press) 45–81.Google Scholar
Bedau, M. 1997. ‘Weak Emergence’, Philosophical Perspectives, 11, 375–99.Google Scholar
Borges, J. L. 1998. ‘On the exactitude of science’, translated by Andrew Hurley in Collected Fictions (New York: Penguin) 325.Google Scholar
Brandon, R. 1997. ‘Does Biology Have Laws? The Experimental Evidence’, Philosophy of Science, 64, S444–S457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burkhardt, R. W. 2013. ‘Lamarck, Evolution, and the Inheritance of Acquired Characters’, Genetics, 194(4), 793–805.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cartwright, N. 1983. How the Laws of Physics Lie (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Cartwright, N. 1999. The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Craver, C. F. 2007. Explaining the Brain: Mechanisms and the Mosaic Unity of Neuroscience (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Craver, C. F. and Bechtel, W. 2007. ‘Top-Down Causation without Top-Down Causes’, Biology and Philosophy, 22(4), 547–63.Google Scholar
Craver, C. and Tabery, J., 2019. ‘Mechanisms in Science’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2019 Ed.), E. N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/science-mechanisms/>..>Google Scholar
Dawkins, R. 1976. The Selfish Gene (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Dawkins, R. 1996. The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design (New York: W. W. Norton & Company).Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. 1996. Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meaning of Life (New York: Simon and Schuster).Google Scholar
Devitt, M. 2008. ‘Resurrecting Biological Essentialism’, Philosophy of Science, 75, 344–82.Google Scholar
Devitt, M. 2010. ‘Species Have (Partly) Intrinsic Essences’, Philosophy of Science, 77, 648–61.Google Scholar
Devitt, M. 2021. ‘Defending Intrinsic Biological Essentialism’. Philosophy of Science, 88, 67–82.Google Scholar
Dobzhansky, T. 1973. ‘Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution’, The American Biology Teacher, 35, 125–9.Google Scholar
Donlan, R. M. 2002. ‘Biofilms: Microbial Life on Surfaces’, Emerging Infectious Diseases, 8(9), 881.Google Scholar
Doolittle, W. F. and Booth, A. 2017. ‘It’s the Song, not the Singer: An Exploration of Holobiosis and Evolutionary Theory’, Biology & Philosophy, 32(1), 5–24.Google Scholar
Doolittle, W. F. and Inkpen, S. A. 2018. ‘Processes and Patterns of Interaction as Units of Selection: An Introduction to ITSNTS Thinking’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(16), 4006–14.Google Scholar
Doolittle, W. F. 2019 . ‘Speciation without Species: A Final Word’, Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology, 11.Google Scholar
Dupre, J. 1993. The Disorder of Things: Metaphysical Foundations of the Disunity of Science (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Dupré, J. 1999. ‘On the Impossibility of a Monistic Account of Species’, in Wilson, R. A. (ed.) Species: New Interdisciplinary Essays (Cambridge MA.: MIT Press) 3–20.Google Scholar
Dupré, J. 2001. ‘In Defence of Classification’, Studies in The History and Philosophy of the Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 32, 203–19.Google Scholar
Dupré, J. 2010. ‘The Polygenomic Organism’, in Parry, S. and Dupré, J. (eds.) Nature After the Genome (Oxford: Blackwell) 19–31. Reprinted in Dupré 2012.Google Scholar
Dupré, J. 2012. Processes of Life (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Dupré, J. 2013. ‘Living Causes’, in Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume, 87 (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 19–37.Google Scholar
Dupré, J. 2017. ‘The Metaphysics of Evolution’, Interface Focus. Published online, 18 August, 2017. http://rsfs.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/7/5/20160148\Google Scholar
Dupré, J. and Güttinger, S. 2016. ‘Viruses as Living Processes’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 59, 109–16.Google Scholar
Dupré, J. and Nicholson, D. J. 2018. ‘A Manifesto for a Processual Philosophy of Biology’, in Nicholson and Dupré, 2018, 3–45.Google Scholar
Dupré, J. and O’Malley, M. A. 2009. ‘Varieties of Living Things: Life at the Intersection of Lineage and Metabolism’, Philosophy and Theory in Biology, 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/ptb.6959004.0001.003Google Scholar
Elias, S. and Banin, E. 2012. ‘Multi-Species Biofilms: Living with Friendly Neighbors’, FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 36(5), 990–1004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ereshefsky, M. 1992. ‘Eliminative pluralism’, Philosophy of Science, 59(4), 671–90.Google Scholar
Ereshefsky, M. 2010. ‘What’s Wrong with the New Biological Essentialism’, Philosophy of Science, 77, 674–85.Google Scholar
Ereshefsky, M. and Pedroso, M. 2013. ‘Biological Individuality: The Case of Biofilms’, Biology and Philosophy, 28(2), 331–49.Google Scholar
Forgacs, G. and Newman, S. A. 2005. Biological Physics of the Developing Embryo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Frigg, R. and Hartmann, S. 2018. ‘Models in Science’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2018 Ed.), E. N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/models-science/.Google Scholar
Gilbert, S. F. and Epel, D. 2015. Ecological Developmental Biology: The Environmental Regulation of Development, Health, and Evolution (Sunderland, MA.: Sinauer Associates).Google Scholar
Ghiselin, M. T. 1974. ‘A Radical Solution to the Species Problem’, Systematic Biology, 23(4), 536–44.Google Scholar
Glennan, S. S. 1996. ‘Mechanisms and the Nature of Causation’, Erkenntnis, 44(1), 49–71.Google Scholar
Glennan, S. and Illari, P. (eds.) 2017. The Routledge Handbook of Mechanisms and Mechanical Philosophy (Abingdon, UK: Taylor & Francis).Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, P. 2000. ‘On the Theoretical Role of “Genetic Coding”’, Philosophy of Science, 67(1), 26–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, P. 2009. Darwinian Populations and Natural Selection (New York: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, P. 2015. ‘Reproduction, Symbiosis and the Eukaryotic Cell’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 112(33), 10120–5.Google Scholar
Green, S. and Batterman, R. (2017). ‘Biology meets Physics: Reductionism and Multi-scale Modelling of Morphogenesis’, Studies in History and Philosophy of the Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 61, 20–34.Google Scholar
Griffiths, P. E. 1999. ‘Squaring the Circle: Natural Kinds with Historical Essences’, in Wilson, R. A. (ed.) Species: New Interdisciplinary Essays (Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press) 209–28.Google Scholar
Griffiths, P. E. and Gray, R. D. 1994. ‘Developmental Systems and Evolutionary Explanation’, The Journal of Philosophy, 91(6), 277–304.Google Scholar
Griffiths, P. E. and Stotz, K. 2018. ‘Developmental Systems Theory as Process Theory’, in Nicholson and Dupré, 2018, 225–45.Google Scholar
Guay, A and Pradeu, T. (eds.) 2015a. Individuals Across the Sciences (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Guay, A., and Pradeu, T. 2015b. ‘To Be Continued: The Genidentity of Physical and Biological Processes’, in Guay and Pradeu (2015a), 317–47.Google Scholar
Güttinger, S. 2018. ‘A Process Ontology for Macromolecular Biology’, in Nicholson and Dupré (2018 ), 303–20.Google Scholar
Güttinger, S. and Dupré, J. 2016. ‘Genomics and Postgenomics’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Ed.), E. N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/genomics/.Google Scholar
Hacking, I. 2007. ‘Natural Kinds: Rosy Dawn, Scholastic Twilight’, Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements, 61, 203–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haldane, J. S. 1931. The Philosophical Basis of Biology (London: Hodder and Stoughton).Google Scholar
Haldane, J. B. S. 1963. ‘Review of The Truth About Death’, Journal of Genetics, 58, 464.Google Scholar
Harré, R. and Madden, E. 1975. Causal Powers: A Theory of Natural Necessity (Oxford: Blackwell).Google Scholar
Hull, D. L. 1976. ‘Are Species Really Individuals?’, Systematic Zoology, 25(2), 174–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, D. L. 1980. ‘Individuality and Selection’, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 11: 311–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphreys, P. 2016. Emergence (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jablonka, E. and Lamb, M. J. 2014. Evolution in Four Dimensions: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life (revised ed.) (Cambridge, MA.: MIT press).Google Scholar
Jablonka, E., and Raz, G. (2009). ‘Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance: Prevalence, Mechanisms, and Implications for the Study of Heredity and Evolution’, The Quarterly Review of Biology, 84(2), 131–76.Google Scholar
Jeffery, C. J. 1999. ‘Moonlighting Proteins’, Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 24(1), 8–11.Google Scholar
Jeffery, C. J. 2009. ‘Moonlighting Proteins – an Update’, Molecular BioSystems, 5(4), 345–50.Google Scholar
Keller, E. F. 2009. The Century of the Gene. (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J. 2000. Mind in a Physical World: An Essay on the Mind-Body Problem and Mental Causation (Cambridge, MA.: MIT press).Google Scholar
Kingma, E. 2019. ‘Were You a Part of your Mother?’, Mind, 128(511), 609–46.Google Scholar
Kitcher, P. 1982. Abusing Science: The Case against Creationism (Cambridge, MA.: MIT press).Google Scholar
KoshlandJr, D. E. 1958. ‘Application of a Theory of Enzyme Specificity to Protein Synthesis’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 44(2), 98.Google Scholar
Laland, K. N., Uller, T., Feldman, M. W., K. et al. 2015. ‘The Extended Evolutionary Synthesis: Its Structure, Assumptions and Predictions’, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282, 20151019.Google Scholar
Lamarck, J. B. 1984/1809. Zoological Philosophy: An Exposition with Regard to the Natural History of Animals, tr. Hugh Elliot (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
Lavialle, C., Cornelis, G., Dupressoir, A., C. et al. 2013. ‘Paleovirology of “Syncytins”, Retroviral Env Genes Exapted for a Role in Placentation’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 368(1626), 20120507. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0507Google Scholar
Leslie, S.-J. 2013. ‘Essence and Natural Kinds: When Science Meets Preschooler Intuition’, in Gendler, T. S. and Hawthorne, J. (eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology Volume 4 (Oxford: Oxford University Press) 108–65.Google Scholar
Lewin, K. 1922. Der Begriff der Genese in Physik, Biologie und Entwicklungsgeschichte: eine Untersuchung zur vergleichenden Wissenschaftslehre (Berlin: Springer).Google Scholar
Lewis, D. K. 1973. ‘Causation’, Journal of Philosophy, 70, 556–67.Google Scholar
Lloyd, E. A. 1988. The Structure and Confirmation of Evolutionary Theory (New York: Greenwood Press).Google Scholar
Lloyd, E. A. 2020. ‘Units and Levels of Selection’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2020 Ed.), E. N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/selection-units/.Google Scholar
Lloyd, E. A. 2017. ‘Holobionts as Units of Selection: Holobionts as Interactors, Reproducers, and Manifestors of Adaptation’, in Gissis, S. B., Lamm, E. and Shavit, A. (eds.), Landscapes of Collectivity in the Life Sciences (Cambridge, MA.: MIT press), 351–67.Google Scholar
Lovelock, J. 2000. Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lovelock, J. 2007. The Revenge of Gaia: Why the Earth is Fighting Back and How We Can Still Save Humanity (London: Penguin).Google Scholar
Machamer, P. K., Darden, L., and Craver, C. F. 2000. ‘Thinking about Mechanisms’, Philosophy of Science, 67, 1–25.Google Scholar
Mallet, J., Besansky, N., and Hahn, M. W. 2016. ‘How Reticulated are Species?’, BioEssays, 38, 140–9.Google Scholar
Mammoto, T. and Ingber, D. E. 2010. ‘Mechanical Control of Tissue and Organ Development’, Development, 137(9), 1407–20.Google Scholar
Mayden, R. L. 1997. ‘A Hierarchy of Species Concepts: The Denouement in the Saga of the Species Problem’, in Claridge, M. F., Dawah, H. A. and Wilson, M. R. (eds.), Species: The Units of Diversity (London: Chapman & Hall), 381–423.Google Scholar
Mayr, E. 1982. The Growth of Biological Thought: Diversity, Evolution and Inheritance (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Mackie, J. L. 1974. The Cement of the Universe: A Study of Causation (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Google Scholar
Meincke, A. S. 2019. ‘The Disappearance of Change: Towards a Process Account of Persistence’, International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 27(1), 12–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meincke, A. S. 2020. ‘Processual Animalism: Towards a Scientifically Informed Theory of Personal Identity’, in Meincke and Dupré 2020.Google Scholar
Meincke, A. S. and Dupré, J. (eds.) 2020. Biological Identity: Perspectives from Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Biology (Abingdon, UK: Routledge).Google Scholar
Meincke, A. S. forthcoming. ‘A Process View of Pregnancy’.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. 1872/1843. A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive: Being a Connected View of the Principles of Evidence and the Methods of Scientific Investigation, 8th ed. (London: Longmans, Green).Google Scholar
Millstein, R. L. 2009. ‘Populations as Individuals’, Biological Theory, 4(3), 267–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moraes, S. S., Cardoso, L. W., Silva-Brandão, K. L. and Duarte, M. 2017. ‘Extreme Sexual Dimorphism and Polymorphism in Two Species of the Tiger Moth Genus Dysschema (Lepidoptera: Erebidae): Association between Males and Females, Sexual Mimicry and Melanism Revealed by Integrative Taxonomy’, Systematics and Biodiversity, 15(3), 259–73.Google Scholar
Moran, N. and Sloan, D. B. 2015. ‘The Hologenome Concept: Helpful or Hollow?’, PLoS Biology, 13(12), e1002311.Google Scholar
Morgan, M. 1999. ‘Learning from Models’, in Morgan, M. and Morrison, M. (eds.) Models as Mediators. Perspectives on Natural and Social Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 347–88.Google Scholar
Müller, G. B. 2007. ‘Evo–Devo: Extending the Evolutionary Synthesis’, Nature Reviews Genetics, 8(12), 943–9.Google Scholar
Mumford, S. and Anjum, R. L. 2011. Getting Causes from Powers (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Newman, S. A. 2020. ‘The Origins and Evolution of Animal Identity’. In Meincke and Dupré, 2020, 128–48.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. E., et al. ‘Evidence for Lateral Gene Transfer between Archaea and Bacteria from Genome Sequence of Thermotoga maritima’, Nature, 399.6734, 323–9.Google Scholar
Nicholson, D. J. 2010. ‘Biological Atomism and Cell Theory’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 41(3), 202–11.Google Scholar
Nicholson, D. J. 2012. ‘The Concept of Mechanism in Biology’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 43(1), 152–63.Google Scholar
Nicholson, D. J. 2014. ‘The Return of the Organism as a Fundamental Explanatory Concept in Biology’, Philosophy Compass, 9(5), 347–59.Google Scholar
Nicholson, D. J. 2018. ‘Reconceptualizing the Organism: From Complex Machine to Flowing Stream’, in Nicholson and Dupré 2018, 139–66.Google Scholar
Nicholson, D. J. 2019. ‘Is the Cell Really a Machine?’, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 477: 108–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicholson, D. J and Dupré, J. 2018. Everything Flows: Towards a Processual Philosophy of Biology (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Nicholson, D. J. and Gawne, R. 2015. ‘Neither Logical Empiricism nor Vitalism, but Organicism: What the Philosophy of Biology Was’, History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 37(4), 345–81.Google Scholar
Odling-Smee, F. J., Laland, K. N. and Feldman, M. W. 2013. Niche Construction: The Neglected Process in Evolution (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Okasha, S. 2006. Evolution and the Levels of Selection (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Okasha, S. 2020. ‘On the very idea of biological individuality’, talk at LSE, 25 February, 2020.Google Scholar
O’Malley, M. A. 2017. ‘From Endosymbiosis to Holobionts: Evaluating a Conceptual Legacy’, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 434, 34–41.Google Scholar
O’Malley, M. A. and Dupré, J.. 2007. ‘Size doesn’t matter: towards a more inclusive philosophy of biology’, Biology and Philosophy, 22, 155–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paluch, E. and Heisenberg, C. P. 2009. ‘Biology and Physics of Cell Shape Changes in Development’, Current Biology, 19(17), R790–R799.Google Scholar
Pradeu, T. 2018. ‘Genidentity and Biological Processes’ in Nicholson and Dupré 2018, 96–112.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. 1975. Mind, Language and Reality (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Rak, R., Dahan, O. and Pilpel, Y. 2018. ‘Repertoires of tRNAs: The Couplers of Genomics and Proteomics’, Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology, 34, 239–64.Google Scholar
Reiss, J. 2009. Not by Design: Retiring Darwin’s Watchmaker (Berkeley, CA.: University of California Press).Google Scholar
Rescher, N. 2006. Process Ontological Deliberations (Frankfurt: Ontos).Google Scholar
Rodgers, A. B., Morgan, C. P., Leu, N. A., and Bale, T. L. 2015. ‘Transgenerational Epigenetic Programming via Sperm MicroRNA Recapitulates Effects of Paternal Stress’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(44), 13699–704.Google Scholar
Robinson, H. 2020. ‘Substance’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2020 Ed.), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/substance/.Google Scholar
Roper, M., Ellison, C., Taylor, J. W. and Glass, N. L. 2011. ‘Nuclear and Genome Dynamics in Multinucleate Ascomycete Fungi’, Current Biology, 21(18), R786–R793.Google Scholar
Roughgarden, J., Gilbert, S. F., Rosenberg, E., Zilber-Rosenberg, I., and Lloyd, E. A. 2018. ‘Holobionts as Units of Selection and a Model of their Population Dynamics and Evolution’, Biological Theory, 13, 44–65.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. 1984. Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
Schrödinger, E. 1944. What is Life? (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
Sivan, E. and Banin, E. 2012. ‘Multi-species Biofilms: Living with Friendly Neighbors’, FEMS Microbiology Reviews, 36, 990–1004.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. 2019. The Darwinian Revolution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, J. A. 2005. ‘A 21st Century View of Evolution: Genome System Architecture, Repetitive DNA, and Natural Genetic Engineering’, Gene, 345(1), 91–100.Google Scholar
Shapiro, J. A. 2017. ‘Biological Action in Read–Write Genome Evolution’,Interface Focus, 7(5), 20160115.Google Scholar
Smith, B. and Mark, D. M. 2003. ‘Do Mountains Exist? Towards an Ontology of Landforms’, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 30(3), 411–27.Google Scholar
Sober, E. and Wilson, D. S. 1999. Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Stein, R. L. 2004. ‘Towards a Process Philosophy of Chemistry’, Hyle: International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry, 10(4), 5–22.Google Scholar
Stein, R. L. 2006. ‘A Process Theory of Enzyme Catalytic Power – The Interplay of Science and Metaphysics’, Foundations of Chemistry, 8, 3–29.Google Scholar
Stein, R. L. 2020. ‘Mechanisms of Macromolecular Reactions’, in press.Google Scholar
Steward, H. 2020. ‘Substances, Agents and Processes’, Philosophy, 95 (1), 41–61.Google Scholar
Stout, R. 2016. ‘The Category of Occurrent Continuants’, Mind, 125(497), 41–62.Google Scholar
Suárez, J. 2020. ‘The Stability of Traits Conception of the Hologenome: An Evolutionary Account of Holobiont Individuality’, History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 42(1), 1–27.Google Scholar
Suárez, J. 2018. ‘The Importance of Symbiosis in Philosophy of Biology: An Analysis of the Current Debate on Biological Individuality and its Historical Roots’, Symbiosis, 76(2), 77–96.Google Scholar
Toon, A. 2012. Models as Make-Believe: Imagination, Fiction and Scientific Representation (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
Weisberg, M. 2012. Simulation and Similarity: Using Models to Understand the World (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
West-Eberhard, M. J. 2003. Developmental Plasticity and Evolution (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Wiggins, D. 2016. ‘Activity, Process, Continuant, Substance, Organism’, Philosophy, 91: 269–80. Reprinted in Meincke and Dupré 2020.Google Scholar
Wilson, J. 2016. ‘Metaphysical Emergence: Weak and Strong’, in Bigaj, T. and Wüthrich, C. (eds.), Metaphysics in Contemporary Physics (Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill | Rodopi).Google Scholar
Wilson, R. A. and Barker, M. J. 2019. ‘Biological Individuals’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2019 Ed.), E. N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2019/entries/biology-individual/.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W. K. 2007. Re-engineering Philosophy for Limited Beings: Piecewise Approximations to Reality (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Winther, R. G. 2016. ‘The Structure of Scientific Theories’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Ed.), E. N. Zalta (ed.), URL = https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/structure-scientific-theories/.Google Scholar
Woodward, J. 2003. Making Things Happen: A Theory of Causal Explanation (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Wu, Q., Medina, S. G., Kushawah, G., et al. 2019. ‘Translation Affects mRNA Stability in a Codon-Dependent Manner in Human Cells’, Elife, 8, e45396.Google Scholar

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The Metaphysics of Biology
  • John Dupré, University of Exeter
  • Online ISBN: 9781009024297
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The Metaphysics of Biology
  • John Dupré, University of Exeter
  • Online ISBN: 9781009024297
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The Metaphysics of Biology
  • John Dupré, University of Exeter
  • Online ISBN: 9781009024297
Available formats
×