Hostname: page-component-76c49bb84f-rx8cm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-08T10:54:45.940Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic Information: A Metaphor In Search of a Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Paul E. Griffiths
Paul E. Griffiths*
Affiliation:
Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh
*
†Send requests for reprints to the author, Department of History and Philosophy of Science, 1017 Cathedral of Learning, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260 USA; email: pauleg@pitt.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

John Maynard Smith has defended against philosophical criticism the view that developmental biology is the study of the expression of information encoded in the genes by natural selection. However, like other naturalistic concepts of information, this “teleosemantic” concept is equally applicable to many non-genetic factors in development. Maynard Smith also fails to show that developmental biology is concerned with teleosemantic information. Some other ways to support Maynard Smith's conclusion are considered. It is argued that on any definition of information the view that development is the expression of genetic information is misleading. Some reasons for the popularity of that view are suggested.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 68 , Issue 3 , September 2001 , pp. 394 - 412
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 2001

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

‡

A version of this paper was read at the International Society for the History, Philosophy, and Social Studies of Biology in Oaxaca, Mexico in June 1999. I am indebted to that audience and to Russell Gray and Robert Olby for comments on the manuscript.

References

Amundson, Ronald and Lauder, George V. (1994), “Function without Purpose: The Uses of Causal Role Function in Evolutionary Biology”, Biology and Philosophy 9(4): 443–470.Google Scholar
Chadarevian, Soraya de (1998), “Of Worms and Programs: Caenorhabitis elegans and the Study of Development”, Studies in History and Philosophy of the Biological and Biomedical Sciences 29(1): 81–105.Google Scholar
Cosmides, Leda, Tooby, John and Barkow, Jerome H. (1992), “Introduction: Evolutionary Psychology and Conceptual Integration”, in Barkow, Jerome H., Cosmides, Leda, and Tooby, John (eds.), The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 3–15.Google Scholar
Dawkins, Richard (1982), The Extended Phenotype, New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Dretske, Fred (1981), Knowledge and the Flow of Information. Oxford: Blackwells.Google Scholar
“Drowning in Data” (1999), The Economist (June 26): 97–98.10.1046/j.1523-536x.1999.00097.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, Peter (1989), “Misinformation”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 19 (5): 533–550.10.1080/00455091.1989.10716781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, Peter (1999a), “Genes and Codes: Lessons from the Philosophy of Mind?”, in Hardcastle, Valerie G. (ed.), Biology Meets Psychology: Constraints, Conjectures, Connections. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 305–331.Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, Peter (1999b), “The Semantic Gene”, Manuscript.Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, Peter (2000), “Information, Arbitrariness, and Selection: Comments on Maynard Smith”, Philosophy of Science 67(2): 202–207.Google Scholar
Gray, Russell D. (1992), “Death of the Gene: Developmental Systems Strike Back”, in Griffiths, Paul E. (ed.), Trees of Life: Essays in the Philosophy of Biology. Kluwer, Dordrecht: 165–210.10.1007/978-94-015-8038-0_7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, Russell D. (2001), “Selfish Genes or Developmental Systems?”, in Singh, Rama S., Krimbas, Costas B., Paul, Diane B. and Beatty, John (eds.), Thinking about Evolution: Historical, Philosophical and Political Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 184–207.Google Scholar
Griesemer, James R. and Wimsatt, William C. (1989), “Picturing Weismannism: A Case Study of Conceptual Evolution”, in Ruse, Michael (ed.), What the Philosophy of Biology Is. Dordecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 75–137.10.1007/978-94-009-1169-7_6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, Paul E. (forthcoming), “The Fearless Vampire Conservator: Philip Kitcher on Genetic Determinism”, in Rehmann-Sutter, Christoph and Neumann-Held, Eva M. (eds.), Genes in Development. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Griffiths, Paul E. and Gray, Russell D. (1994), “Developmental Systems and Evolutionary Explanation.” Journal of Philosophy XCI (6): 277–304.10.2307/2940982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, Paul E. and Gray, Russell D. (1997), “Replicator II: Judgment Day”, Biology and Philosophy 12(4): 471–492.Google Scholar
Griffiths, Paul E. and Gray, Russell D. (2001), “Darwinism and Developmental Systems”, in Oyama, Susan, Griffiths, Paul E. and Gray, Russell D. (eds.), Cycles of Contingency: Developmental Systems and Evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 195–218.Google Scholar
Griffiths, Paul E. and Knight, Robin D. (1998), “What is the Developmentalist Challenge?”, Philosophy of Science 65(2): 253–258.Google Scholar
Immelmann, Klaus (1975), “Ecological Significance of Imprinting and Early Learning”, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 6: 15–37.10.1146/annurev.es.06.110175.000311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jablonka, Eva and Lamb, M. J. (1995), Epigenetic Inheritance and Evolution: The Lamarkian Dimension. Oxford, New York, Tokyo: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jablonka, Eva and Szathmáry, Eörs (1995), “The Evolution of Information Storage and Heredity”, Trends in Ecology and Evolution 10(5): 206–211.Google Scholar
Johnston, Timothy D. (1987), “The Persistence of Dichotomies in the Study of Behavioural Development”, Developmental Review 7: 149–182.10.1016/0273-2297(87)90011-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, Evelyn Fox (1995), Refiguring Life: Metaphors of Twentieth Century Biology. New York: Columbia University Press.10.7312/kell92562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, Laurent and Ross, K. G. (1993), “Phenotypic Plasticity and ‘Cultural Transmission’ of Alternative Social Organisations in the Fire Ant Solenopsis invicta”, Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology 33: 121–129.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Phillip (2001), “Battling the Undead: How (and How Not) to Resist Genetic Determinism”, in Singh, Rama S., Krimbas, Costas B., Paul, Diane B. and Beatty, John (eds.), Thinking about Evolution: Historical, Philosophical and Political Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 396–414.Google Scholar
Knight, Robin D., Freeland, Stephen J. and Landweber, Laura F. (1999), “Selection, History and Chemistry: The Three Faces of the Genetic Code”, Trends in Biochemical Science 24(6): 241–247.Google Scholar
Kruszelnicki, Karl (1998), “Why You Should Study Bioinformatics”, University of Sydney Science Faculty publicity material.Google Scholar
Laland, Kevin N., Odling-Smee, F. John, and Feldman, Marcus W. (2001), “Niche Construction, Ecological Inheritance, and Cycles of Contingency in Evolution”, in Oyama, Susan, Griffiths, Paul E. and Gray, Russell D. (eds.), Cycles of Contingency: Developmental Systems and Evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 117–126.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, John (1993), The Theory of Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, John (2000a), “The Concept of Information in Biology”, Philosophy of Science 67(2): 177–194.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, John (2000b), “Reply to Commentaries”, Philosophy of Science 67(2): 214–218.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, John and Szathmáry, Eörs (1995), The Major Transitions in Evolution. Oxford, New York, Heidelberg: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Millikan, Ruth G. (1984), Language, Thought and Other Biological Categories, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Moran, N. and Baumann, P. (1994), “Phylogenetics of Cytoplasmically Inherited Microorganisms of Arthropods”, Trends in Ecology and Evolution 9: 15–20.10.1016/0169-5347(94)90226-7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mount, A. B. (1964), “The Interdependence of the Eucalpyts and Forest Fires in Southern Australia”, Australian Forestry 28: 166–172.10.1080/00049158.1964.10675366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Odling-Smee, F. John (1988), “Niche-Constructing Phenotypes”, in Plotkin, H.C. (ed.), The Role of Behavior in Evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 73–132.Google Scholar
Odling-Smee, F. John, Laland, Kevin N., and Feldman, Marcus W. (1996), “Niche Construction”, American Naturalist 147(4): 641–648.Google Scholar
Oyama, Susan (2000a), The Ontogeny of Information, 2nd ed. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Oyama, Susan (2000b), Evolution's Eye: A Systems View of the Biology-Culture Divide. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.10.1215/9780822380658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papineau, David (1987), Reality and Representation. New York: Blackwells.Google Scholar
Radford, T. (1997), “Genes Say Boys Will Be Boys and Girls Will Be Sensitive”, The Guardian (June 12): 1.Google Scholar
Sarkar, Sahotra (1996), “Biological Information: A Sceptical Look at Some Central Dogmas of Molecular Biology”, in Sarkar, S. (ed.), The Philosophy and History of Molecular Biology: New Perspectives. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 187–232.10.1007/978-0-585-31233-0_11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shannon, Claude E. and Weaver, W. (1949), The Mathematical Theory of Communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Skuse, D. H. et al. (1997), “Evidence from Turner's Syndrome of an Imprinted X-Linked Locus Affecting Cognitive Function”, Nature 387(12 June): 705–708.10.1038/42706CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sterelny, Kim (2000), “The ‘Genetic Program’ Program: A Commentary on Maynard Smith on Information in Biology”, Philosophy of Science 67(2): 195–201.Google Scholar
Sterelny, Kim, Dickison, Michael and Smith, Kelly C. (1996), “The Extended Replicator”, Biology and Philosophy 11(3): 377–403.Google Scholar
Sterelny, Kim and Griffiths, Paul E. (1999), Sex and Death: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Biology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226178653.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar