Mutationism, not Lamarckism, captures the novelty of CRISPR–Cas

Biology and Philosophy 34 (1):12 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Koonin, in an article in this issue, claims that CRISPR–Cas systems are mechanisms for the inheritance of acquired adaptive characteristics, and that the operation of such systems comprises a “Lamarckian mode of evolution.” We argue that viewing the CRISPR–Cas mechanism as facilitating a form of “directed mutation” more accurately represents how the system behaves and the history of neoDarwinian thinking, and is to be preferred.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

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

CRISPR-Cas changing biology?Janella Baxter - 2019 - Biology and Philosophy 34 (1):15.
“Editing”: A Productive Metaphor for Regulating CRISPR.Ben Merriman - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):62-64.
CRISPR Critters and CRISPR Cracks.R. Alta Charo & Henry T. Greely - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):11-17.
Is CRISPR an Ethical Game Changer?Marcus Schultz-Bergin - 2018 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 31 (2):219-238.
CRISPR Becomes Clearer.Andrew W. Torrance - 2017 - Hastings Center Report 47 (5):5-6.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-02-12

Downloads
36 (#431,270)

6 months
3 (#1,023,809)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Stephen Andrew Inkpen
Harvard University
W. Doolittle
Dalhousie University