Big Dreams for Small Creatures: Ilana and Eugene Rosenberg’s path to the Hologenome Theory

A biographical sketch of the Hologenome Theory

How to be rational about empirical success in ongoing science: The case of the quantum nose and its critics

Empirical success is a central criterion for scientific decision-making. Yet its understanding in philosophical studies of science deserves renewed attention: Should philosophers think differently about the advancement of science when they deal with the uncertainty of outcome in ongoing research in comparison with historical episodes? This paper argues that normative appeals to empirical success in the evaluation of competing scientific explanations can result in unreliable conclusions, especially when we are looking at the changeability of direction in unsettled investigations. The challenges we encounter arise from the inherent dynamics of disciplinary and experimental objectives in research practice. In this paper we discuss how these dynamics inform the evaluation of empirical success by analyzing three of its requirements: data accommodation, instrumental reliability, and predictive power. We conclude that the assessment of empirical success in developing inquiry is set against the background of a model's interactive success and prospective value in an experimental context. Our argument is exemplified by the analysis of an apparent controversy surrounding the model of a quantum nose in research on olfaction. Notably, the public narrative of this controversy rests on a distorted perspective on measures of empirical success

David Baltimore Oral History

Susan Mehrtens\u27 Note: We met in Dr. Baltimore\u27s office at the Whitehead Institute, and our meeting was short (less than 45 minutes) but direct and to the point: Baltimore credits The Jackson Laboratory for setting him on his course as a biologist, but beyond that, he sees Jax as a dated, low-key place. One speaking engagement at Jax that left him astonished to see an empty parking lot at 5PM made an indelible impression on him and he echoes the attitudes of others outside Jax--like Law and Sprott--that Jax is not a dynamic, hotshot institution on the cutting edge of science. Value this tape as the candid assessment of the Lab by an outstanding molecular geneticist whose views are representative of the outsider\u27s view of the Lab

Genetic epistemology and the sociology of knowledge

Bibliography: leaves 263-286.This study originates in certain shortcomings in the sociology of knowledge and in sociological theory generally. Among such shortcomings are: an unnecessarily restricted conception of knowledge, the neglect of contemporary findings in biology and psychology, and the oversocialized conception of humankind and knowledge. This study aims to correct certain of these shortcomings through redefining knowledge and developing part of a comprehensive theory of knowledge which unites the biology of knowledge, the psychology of knowledge and the sociology of knowledge. Piaget's genetic epistemology and Popper's and Lorenz's evolutionary epistemology provide much of the material which inspired this study and which is developed in it. It is argue that the sociology of knowledge has not yet seriously encountered these disciplines and would benefit from such an encounter. Ethology, developmental psychology, cybernetics, and anthropology are other sources of information used. Knowledge is defined as assimilated information. It is argued that knowledge is assimilated in three basic contexts: that of the species, the individual organism, and the collectivity. These yield, respectively, innate knowledge, learnt knowledge, and social knowledge. Knowledge, thus, is viewed as evolving phylogenetically, ontogenetically, and socio-genetically. Various theses are proposed and arguments and facts supporting them presented in the course of developing the theory of knowledge. The following are among the theses proposed: Life is a knowledge process. Human knowledge and knowledge processes can be illuminated by studying the intellectual development of animals and children. Human knowledge and reality are biologically, psychologically, and sociologically constructed. All humans are born with an innate learning schema. This schema is responsible for human life and culture. It plays an important part in determining the pattern and content of culture. Truth is, in part, biologically determined. Society depends on many forms of non-social knowledge. The understanding of culture requires an understanding of the varieties and forms of nonsocial knowledge which make culture possible. The study constitutes a contribution to knowledge in various ways. Rather than considering the relationship between biology and behaviour as is customary, this study considers the relationship between biology and knowledge. Certain new concepts are introduced and a theory of knowledge is outlined which integrates the biology of knowledge, the psychology of knowledge and the sociology of knowledge. The study demonstrates that humankind's biological nature plays a vital role in socialization and in the production of culture. It thus serves to correct oversocialized views of humankind. The study reveals that reality is phylogenetically, ontogenetically and sociogenetically constructed; it is the result of the evolution and operation of biological, psychological and sociological factors