The curious case of blending inheritance

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 46 (1):125-132 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

For more than a century, geneticists have consistently identified the origins of their science with Gregor Mendel’s experiments on peas. Mendelism, they have said, demonstrated at long last that biological inheritance was not, as had so often been supposed, “blending,” but particulate. Many historians of biology continue to interpret the conflict of biometricians and Mendelians at the start of the twentieth century in these terms, identifying biometry with the blending mechanism. But this view of blending is history as war by other means. While Francis Galton’s contrast between blended and alternate inheritance had become familiar by 1905, he and his interpreters understood the two forms as differing outcomes of breeding, not as rival theories. Only a few biologists in this period went beyond blending as a description of results of breeding to a blending mechanism, and these were not biometricians. Recognizing this, we can see also that statistical methods and models were central to evolutionary genetics right from the start. The evolutionary synthesis, while reshaping their role, did not create it.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,628

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

Did Jenkin's swamping argument invalidate Darwin's theory of natural selection?Michael Bulmer - 2004 - British Journal for the History of Science 37 (3):281-297.
Gemmules and Elements: On Darwin’s and Mendel’s Concepts and Methods in Heredity. [REVIEW]Ute Deichmann - 2010 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 41 (1):85-112.
Biology and the emergence of the Anglo-American eugenics movement.Edward J. Larson - 2010 - In Denis Alexander & Ronald L. Numbers (eds.), Biology and Ideology From Descartes to Dawkins. London: University of Chicago Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-05-06

Downloads
36 (#440,811)

6 months
2 (#1,187,206)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Whatever Happened to Reversion?Charles H. Pence - 2022 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 92 (C):97-108.
New historical and philosophical perspectives on quantitative genetics.Davide Serpico, Kate E. Lynch & Theodore M. Porter - 2023 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 97 (C):29-33.
Of stirps and chromosomes: Generality through detail.Charles H. Pence - 2022 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 94 (C):177-190.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references