Closing the door on Hugo de Vries' Mendelism

Annals of Science 51 (3):225-248 (1994)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Recent studies have shown that Hugo de Vries did not rediscover Mendel's laws independently and that the classical story of the rediscovery of Mendel is largely a myth. Until now, however, no satisfactory account has been provided of the background and development of de Vries' views on heredity and evolution. The basic tenets of de Vries' Mutationstheorie and his conception of Mendelism are still insufficiently understood. It has been suggested that de Vries failed to assimilate Mendelism and that he wrote his Mutationstheorie in a state of confusion. In this paper I argue that we can arrive at a better understanding by adopting a more symmetrical approach. My analysis will concentrate on three important aspects of de Vries' thinking which have been insufficiently appreciated until now. The first is that de Vries' reading of Mendel compelled him to change his conception of the hereditary particles, the pangenes, in a fundamental way. The second is de Vries' use of the notion of ‘hereditary force’. The third revolves around de Vries' typological species concept, which has been the source of much confusion in the literature. I shall conclude that de Vries did succeed in incorporating ‘Mendelism’ into his wider views on heredity and evolution, and that he did manage to handle his evidence in a consistent way. Yet I shall also conclude that Mendelism, in de Vries' interpretation, had nothing to do with ‘normal’ heredity and was mainly a laboratory phenomenon

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,322

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-20

Downloads
29 (#532,461)

6 months
2 (#1,244,653)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Hugo de Vries and the reception of the?mutation theory?Garland E. Allen - 1969 - Journal of the History of Biology 2 (1):55-87.
Hugo De Vries and the Reception of the "Mutation Theory".Garland E. Allen - 1969 - Journal of the History of Biology 2 (1):55 - 87.
Hugo de vries no mendelian?Onno G. Meijer - 1985 - Annals of Science 42 (3):189-232.
Francis Galton's contribution to genetics.Ruth Schwartz Cowan - 1972 - Journal of the History of Biology 5 (2):389-412.

View all 6 references / Add more references