Trashing life’s tree

Biology and Philosophy 25 (4):689-709 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The Tree of Life has traditionally been understood to represent the history of species lineages. However, recently researchers have suggested that it might be better interpreted as representing the history of cellular lineages, sometimes called the Tree of Cells. This paper examines and evaluates reasons offered against this cellular interpretation of the Tree of Life. It argues that some such reasons are bad reasons, based either on a false attribution of essentialism, on a misunderstanding of the problem of lineage identity, or on a limited view of scientific representation. I suggest that debate about the Tree of Cells and other successors to the traditional Tree of Life should be formulated in terms of the purposes these representations may serve. In pursuing this strategy, we see that the Tree of Cells cannot serve one purpose suggested for it: as an explanation for the hierarchical nature of taxonomy. We then explore whether, instead, the tree may play an important role in the dynamic modeling of evolution. As highly-integrated complex systems, cells may influence which lineage components can successfully transfer into them and how they change once integrated. Only if they do in fact have a substantial role to play in this process might the Tree of Cells have some claim to be the Tree of Life.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-06-12

Downloads
282 (#41,046)

6 months
9 (#87,382)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Laura Franklin-Hall
New York University

References found in this work

The Sciences of the Artificial.Herbert Alexander Simon - 1969 - Cambridge, Massachusetts: [Cambridge, M.I.T. Press.
Science, Truth, and Democracy.Philip Kitcher - 2001 - Oxford University Press.

View all 28 references / Add more references