How Theories Became Knowledge: Morgan's Chromosome Theory of Heredity in America and Britain [Book Review]

Journal of the History of Biology 35 (3):471-535 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

T. H. Morgan, A. H. Sturtevant, H. J. Muller and C. B. Bridges published their comprehensive treatise "The Mechanism of Mendelian Heredity" in 1915. By 1920 Morgan 's "Chromosome Theory of Heredity" was generally accepted by geneticists in the United States, and by British geneticists by 1925. By 1930 it had been incorporated into most general biology, botany, and zoology textbooks as established knowledge. In this paper, I examine the reasons why it was accepted as part of a series of comparative studies of theory-acceptance in the sciences. In this context it is of interest to look at the persuasiveness of confirmed novel predictions, a factor often regarded by philosophers of science as the most important way to justify a theory. Here it turns out to play a role in the decision of some geneticists to accept the theory, but is generally less important than the CTH's ability to explain Mendelian inheritance, sex-linked inheritance, non-disjunction, and the connection between linkage groups and the number of chromosome pairs; in other words, to establish a firm connection between genetics and cytology. It is remarkable that geneticists were willing to accept the CTH as applicable to all organisms at a time when it had been confirmed only for Drosophila. The construction of maps showing the location on the chromosomes of genes for specific characters was especially convincing for non-geneticists

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,642

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

William Bateson and the chromosome theory of heredity: a reappraisal.Alan R. Rushton - 2014 - British Journal for the History of Science 47 (1):147-171.
Linkage: From Particulate to Interactive Genetics. [REVIEW]Raphael Falk - 2003 - Journal of the History of Biology 36 (1):87 - 117.
Mendelian-Mutationism: The Forgotten Evolutionary Synthesis.Arlin Stoltzfus & Kele Cable - 2014 - Journal of the History of Biology 47 (4):501-546.
What was classical genetics?C. Kenneth Waters - 2004 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 35 (4):783-809.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-05-29

Downloads
15 (#244,896)

6 months
48 (#320,809)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Presume It Not: True Causes in the Search for the Basis of Heredity.Aaron Novick & Raphael Scholl - 2017 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (1):axy001.
Predictivism and the periodic table.Stephen G. Brush - 2007 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 38 (1):256-259.
'Your true and proper gender': the Barr body as a good enough science of sex.Fiona Alice Miller - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 37 (3):459-483.

View all 12 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Edited by Ian Hacking.
Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes.Imre Lakatos - 1970 - In Imre Lakatos & Alan Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge. Cambridge [Eng.]: Cambridge University Press. pp. 91-196.
A novel defense of scientific realism.Jarrett Leplin - 1997 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Sex and Death: An Introduction to Philosophy of Biology.Kim Sterelny & Paul Edmund Griffiths - 1999 - Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

View all 67 references / Add more references