Metaphysics of Biological Individuality: Arguments for a Pluralist Approach
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22370/rhv2022iss20pp271-290Keywords:
biological individual, ontological pluralism, processual ontology, perspectivism, active realismAbstract
Pluralistic approaches in the philosophy of biological individuality suggest that reality is divisible into multiple types of biological individuals (evolutionary, genetic, physiological, etc.). In this research I will argue in favor of this pluralistic ontology. Inspired mainly by John Dupré’s processual metaphysics, Ronald Giere’s perspectivism, and Hasok Chang’s active realism, I will suggest that: (i) biological individuals are temporarily stable nexuses in a flow of causal processes, (ii) individuations in biology represent real individuals only under the scientific perspectives that support them, (iii) biology’s ability to recognize diverse types of individuals comes from epistemically successful individuation practices. These practices not only contact us with multiple sites of reality, but also invite us to embrace pluralism as an effective way to increase our scientific knowledge of nature.
References
Atran, S., Medin, D. L. (2008). The native mind and the cultural construction of nature. Cambridge: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/7683.001.0001
Bonner, J. T. (2001). First signals. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400830589
Bouchard, F., Huneman, P. (Eds.) (2013). From groups to individuals: evolution and emerging individuality. Cambridge: MIT Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8921.001.0001
Buss, L. W. (1987). The Evolution of Individuality. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt7zvwtj
Chang, H. (2012). Is water H2O? Evidence, realism, and pluralism. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3932-1
Chang, H. (2017). VI—Operational Coherence as the Source of Truth. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 117(2), 103–122. https://doi.org/10.1093/arisoc/aox004
Chang, H. (2018). Is pluralism compatible with scientific realism?. En Saatsi, J. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of scientific realism, pp. 176-186. Oxford: Routledge.
Chauvier, S. (2015). Why Individuality Matters. En Guay, A., Pradeu, T. (Eds.), Individuals Across the Sciences, pp. 25-45. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199382514.003.0002
Chauvier, S. (2017). Individuality and aggregativity. Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology, 9(11), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3998/ptb.6959004.0009.011
Chen, R. L. (2015). Experimental Realization of Individuality. En Guay, A., Pradeu, T. (Eds.), Individuals Across the Sciences, pp. 348-370. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199382514.003.0018
Clarke, E. (2010). The Problem of Biological Individuality. Biological Theory, 5(4), 312-325. https://doi.org/10.1162/BIOT_a_00068
Clarke, E. (2013). The Multiple Realizability of Biological Individuals. Journal of Philosophy, 110(8), 413-435. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil2013110817
Dupré, J. (1993). The disorder of things: Metaphysical foundations of the disunity of science. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Dupré, J. (2012). Processes of life: Essays in the philosophy of biology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199691982.001.0001
Eisen-Enosh, A., Farah, N., Burgansky-Eliash, Z., Polat, U. y Mandel, Y. (2017). Evaluation of Critical Flicker-Fusion Frequency Measurement Methods for the Investigation of Visual Temporal Resolution. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 15621.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-15034-z
Ellis, B. (1988). Internal realism. Synthese, 76(3), 409-434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00869609
Elwick, J. (2017). Distrust That Particular Intuition: Resilient Essentialisms and Empirical Challenges in the History of Biological Individuality. En Lidgard, S., Nyhart, L. K. (Eds.), Biological Individuality, pp. 277-296. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226446592.003.0012
Ereshefsky, M., Pedroso, M. (2013). Biological individuality: the case of biofilms. Biology & Philosophy, 28(2), 331-349. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-012-9340-4
Flemming, HC., Wingender, J., Szewzyk, U. et al. (2016). Biofilms: an emergent form of bacterial life. Nat Rev Microbiol, 14, 563–575. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2016.94
Ghiselin, M.T. (1974). A radical solution to the species problem. Systematic Zoology, 23(4), 536-544. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/23.4.536
Giere, R. N. (2006a). Scientific perspectivism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226292144.001.0001
Giere, R. N. (2006b). Perspectival pluralism. En Kellert, S. H., Longino, H. E., Waters, C. K. (Eds.), Scientific Pluralism, pp. 26-41. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.
Godfrey-Smith, P. (2013). Darwinian individuals. En Bouchard, F., Huneman, P. (Eds.), From groups to individuals: evolution and emerging individuality, pp. 17-36. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Guay, A., Pradeu, T. (Eds.). (2015a). Individuals Across the Sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199382514.001.0001
Guay, A., Pradeu, T. (2015b). To Be Continued: The Genidentity of Physical and Biological Processes. En Guay, A., Pradeu, T. (eds.), Individuals Across the Sciences, pp. 317-347. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199382514.003.0017
Haber, M. (2013). Colonies are individuals: revisiting the superorganism revival. En Bouchard, F., Huneman, P. (Eds.), From groups to individuals: evolution and emerging individuality, pp. 195-218. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511814563
Healy, K., Mcnally, L., Ruxton, G. D., Cooper, N., Jackson, A. L. (2013). Metabolic rate and body size are linked with perception of temporal information. Animal Behaviour, 86(4), 685-696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.06.018
Hölldobler, B., Wilson, E. O. (2009). The superorganism: the beauty, elegance, and strangeness of insect societies. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Hull, D.L. (1976). Are Species Really Individuals?. Systematic Zoology, 25(2), 174-191. https://doi.org/10.2307/2412744
Hull, D.L. (1978). A Matter of Individuality. Philosophy of Science, 45(3), 335-360. https://doi.org/10.1086/288811
Kaiser, M. I. (2018). Individuating part-whole relations in the biological world. En Bueno, O., Chen, R.L., Fagan, M.B. (Eds.), Individuation, Process, and Scientific Practices, pp. 63-89. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190636814.001.0001
Kitcher, P. (1992). Gene: current usages. En Keller, E. F., Lloyd, E. A. (Eds.), Keywords in Evolutionary Biology, pp. 128-131. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Lidgard, S., Nyhart, L. K. (Eds.). (2017a). Biological Individuality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226446592.001.0001
Lidgard, S., Nyhart, L.K. (2017b). The work of biological individuality: concepts and contexts. En Lidgard, S., Nyhart, L.K. (Eds.), Biological Individuality, pp. 17-62. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226446592.003.0002
Longino, H. E. (2002). The fate of knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691187013
Love, A. C., Brigandt, I. (2017). Philosophical Dimensions of Individuality. En Lidgard, S., Nyhart, L.K. (Eds.), Biological Individuality, pp. 318-348. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226446592.003.0014
Margulis, L. (1967). On the origin of mitosing cells. Journal of theoretical biology, 14(3), 225-IN6. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(67)90079-3
Massimi, M. (2018). Perspectivism. En Saatsi, J. (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Scientific Realism, pp.164-175. Oxford: Routledge.
Medin, D. L., Atran, S. (1999). Folkbiology. Cambridge: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3042.001.0001
Molter, D. (2017). On Mushroom Individuality. Philosophy of Science, 84(5), 1117-1127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/694011
Moritz, R., Southwick, E. E. (1992). Bees as superorganisms: an evolutionary reality. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media. DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-84666-3
Mullineaux, C. W. (2015). Bacteria in solitary confinement. Journal of Bacteriology, 197(4), 670-671. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.02509-14
Nicholson, D.J., Dupré, J. (2018). Everything Flows: Towards a Processual Philosophy of Biology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI:10.1093/oso/9780198779636.001.0001
Niklas, K.J, Newman, S.A. (2016). Multicellularity. Origins and Evolution. Cambridge: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/10525.001.0001
O’Malley, M. (2014). Philosophy of Microbiology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139162524
Pradeu, T. (2016). Organisms or biological individuals? Combining physiological and evolutionary individuality. Biology & Philosophy, 31(6), 797-817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-016-9551-1
Putnam, H. (1975). What is mathematical truth?. En Putnam, H. (Ed.), Mathematics, matter, and method. Philosophical papers, vol. 1, pp. 60-78. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Queller, D. C., Strassmann, J. E. (2009). Beyond society: the evolution of organismality. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1533), 3143-3155. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0095
Reynolds, A.S. (2017). Discovering the ties that bind: cell-cell communication and the development of cell sociology. En Lidgard, S., Nyhart, L.K. (Eds.), Biological Individuality, pp. 109-128. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226446592.003.0005
Shapiro, J. A. (1998). Thinking about bacterial populations as multicellular organisms. Annual Review of Microbiology, 52, 81-104. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.micro.52.1.81
Smith, J. M., Szathmary, E. (1997). The major transitions in evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198502944.001.0001
Strassmann, J. E., Queller, D. C. (2010). The Social Organism: Congresses, Parties, and Committees. Evolution, 64(3), 605-616. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2009.00929.x
van Inwagen, P. (2018). Metaphysics. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429495021
Waters, C. K. (2018). Ask Not “What Is an Individual?”. En Bueno, O., Chen, R.L., Fagan, M.B. (Eds.), Individuation, Process, and Scientific Practices, pp. 91-113. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190636814.003.0005
Wilson, D. S., Sober, E. (1989). Reviving the superorganism. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 136(3), 337-356. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5193(89)80169-9
Wilson, J. (1999). Biological Individuality: The Identity and Persistence of Living Entities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139137140
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Revista de Humanidades de Valparaíso
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication, with the work after publication simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
