Abstract

One of the admirable purposes of the current anthology is to attempt a dialogue between professional philosophers of biology and biological scientists. This is indeed an ambitious undertaking, because although the former group pays a lot of attention to the latter, active scientists rarely pay heed to what the philosophers of biology, or even of science in general, have to say. The current paper is an attempt to address some reasons why this might be so from the bench-level view of a biological scientist who has only a superficial acquaintance with the philosophy of science. Any excursion out of the confines of one’s professional discipline, such as the current one, generates the healthy fear that the exercise will end up in humiliation for the fool who attempts it. I have, perhaps foolishly, overcome this fear in the spirit of this symposium, with the hope that my more glaring errors of interpretation of the philosophy of science will be forgiven by the professional philosophers reading this paper, in the interest of establishing a dialogue.