Metaphysics of Biological Individuality: Arguments for a Pluralist Approach

Authors

  • Francisco Javier Navarro Cárdenas Universidad Austral de Chile

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22370/rhv2022iss20pp271-290

Keywords:

biological individual, ontological pluralism, processual ontology, perspectivism, active realism

Abstract

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

2022-12-01 — Updated on 2022-12-02

How to Cite

Navarro Cárdenas, F. J. (2022). Metaphysics of Biological Individuality: Arguments for a Pluralist Approach. Revista De Humanidades De Valparaíso, (20), 271–290. https://doi.org/10.22370/rhv2022iss20pp271-290

Issue

Section

Articles

Similar Articles

<< < 1 2 3 4 5 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.