Who’s Afraid of Gory Details?

Abstract

Philip Kitcher’s ‘gory detail’ argument aims to prove that molecular biology does not always have an explanatory primacy over higher-level functional biology. Explanations of higher-level biological discipline – functional biology – are completely adequate for explaining higher-level biological phenomena, and none of the gory molecular details of biological processes improve our understanding of these biological facts. I dispute Kitcher’s arguments by pointing out three problems embedded in his accounts. First, his view of molecular biology does not aptly reflect the nature of molecular biology that continuously provides richer and richer causal explanations about biological phenomena as well as information on their molecular level. Second, having this feature, molecular biology canhardly be deemed explanatorily irrelevant in explaining higher-level biological facts. Nor are explanations of molecular biology unexplainable. Third, functional biology fails to offer accurate and complete explanations about biological phenomena that are caused by the changes occurring at the molecular level. Functional biology does not remain stable in its ability to provide reliable explanations and thus loses its explanatory primacy to molecular biology. After all, molecular biology generates precise explanations of biological phenomena with reliable predictive power

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,805

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
2013-04-04

Downloads
24 (#478,770)

6 months
1 (#386,031)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Sun Kyeong Yu
Minnesota State University, Mankato

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Adaptive Radiation of Biological Explanation.Niall Shanks - 2001 - Idealistic Studies 31 (2/3):155-168.
Mechanism Schemas and the Relationship Between Biological Theories.Tudor M. Baetu - 2011 - In Phyllis McKay Illari Federica Russo (ed.), Causality in the Sciences. Oxford University Press.
Molecular Biology and the Unity of Science.Harold Kincaid - 1990 - Philosophy of Science 57 (4):575-593.
Reductionism in a Historical Science.Alex Rosenberg - 2001 - Philosophy of Science 68 (2):135-163.
Naturalists, Molecular Biologists, and the Challenges of Molecular Evolution.Joel B. Hagen - 1999 - Journal of the History of Biology 32 (2):321 - 341.
Homology in Comparative, Molecular, and Evolutionary Developmental Biology: The Radiation of a Concept.Ingo Brigandt - 2003 - Journal of Experimental Zoology (Molecular and Developmental Evolution) 299:9-17.
How is Biological Explanation Possible?Alexander Rosenberg - 2001 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (4):735-760.
Interactions Among Theory, Experiment, and Technology in Molecular Biology.Kenneth F. Schaffner - 1994 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:192 - 205.