Using as case studies two early diagrams that represent mechanisms of the cell division cycle, we aim to extend prior philosophical analyses of the roles of diagrams in scientific reasoning, and specifically their role in biological reasoning. The diagrams we discuss are, in practice, integral and indispensible elements of reasoning from experimental data about the cell division cycle to mathematical models of the cycle’s molecular mechanisms. In accordance with prior analyses, the diagrams provide functional explanations of the cell cycle and (...) facilitate the construction of mathematical models of the cell cycle. But, extending beyond those analyses, we show how diagrams facilitate the construction of mathematical models, and we argue that the diagrams permit nomological explanations of the cell cycle. We further argue that what makes diagrams integral and indispensible for explanation and model construction is their nature as locality aids: they group together information that is to be used together in a way that sentential representations do not. (shrink)

With the emergence of systems biology the notion of organizing principles is being highlighted as a key research aim. Researchers attempt to ‘reverse engineer’ the functional organization of biological systems using methodologies from mathematics, engineering and computer science while taking advantage of data produced by new experimental techniques. While systems biology is a relatively new approach, the quest for general principles of biological organization dates back to systems theoretic approaches in early and mid-20th century. The aim of this paper is (...) to draw on this historical background in order to increase the understanding of the motivation behind the systems theoretic approach and to clarify different epistemic aims within systems biology. We pinpoint key aspects of earlier approaches that also underlie the current practice. These are i) the focus on relational and system-level properties, ii) the inherent critique of reductionism and fragmentation of knowledge resulting from overspecialization, and iii) the insight that the ideal of formulating abstract organizing principles is complementary to, rather than conflicting with, the aim of formulating detailed explanations of biological mechanisms. We argue that looking back not only helps us understand the current practice but also points to possible future directions for systems biology. (shrink)

Precision medicine and molecular systems medicine (MSM) are highly utilized and successful approaches to improve understanding, diagnosis, and treatment of many diseases from bench-to-bedside. Especially in the COVID-19 pandemic, molecular techniques and biotechnological innovation have proven to be of utmost importance for rapid developments in disease diagnostics and treatment, including DNA and RNA sequencing technology, treatment with drugs and natural products and vaccine development. The COVID-19 crisis, however, has also demonstrated the need for systemic thinking and transdisciplinarity and the limits (...) of MSM: the neglect of the bio-psycho-social systemic nature of humans and their context as the object of individual therapeutic and population-oriented interventions. COVID-19 illustrates how a medical problem requires a transdisciplinary approach in epidemiology, pathology, internal medicine, public health, environmental medicine, and socio-economic modeling. Regarding the need for conceptual integration of these different kinds of knowledge we suggest the application of general system theory (GST). This approach endorses an organism-centered view on health and disease, which according to Ludwig von Bertalanffy who was the founder of GST, we call Organismal Systems Medicine (OSM). We argue that systems science offers wider applications in the field of pathology and can contribute to an integrative systems medicine by (i) integration of evidence across functional and structural differentially scaled subsystems, (ii) conceptualization of complex multilevel systems, and (iii) suggesting mechanisms and non-linear relationships underlying the observed phenomena. We underline these points with a proposal on multi-level systems pathology including neurophysiology, endocrinology, immune system, genetics, and general metabolism. An integration of these areas is necessary to understand excess mortality rates and polypharmacological treatments. In the pandemic era this multi-level systems pathology is most important to assess potential vaccines, their effectiveness, short-, and long-time adverse effects. We further argue that these conceptual frameworks are not only valid in the COVID-19 era but also important to be integrated in a medicinal curriculum. (shrink)

Thema dieses Buches ist weder die Philosophie der Zeit noch eine römische Chronologie, sondern eine Untersuchung der literarischen Reflexion der Zeitordnung in Rom. Es sagt wenig darüber, "wie es wirklich gewesen", und mehr darüber, wie diese Ordnung sprachlich konstituiert wurde, welche Metaphern sie hervorbrachte und welche Argumente im römischen Zeitdiskurs präsent waren. Wichtigstes Ziel ist die interpretatorische Erschließung der relevanten Texte und, daran anknüpfend, die Rekonstruktion des kulturellen Wissens in Bezug auf das tempus Romanum. Dieses Wissen konkretisiert sich in der (...) Darstellung der beiden Organisationsinstrumente der Zeit, Kalender und Uhr; es wird in die Kulturentstehungslehren integriert, der Kulturkritik unterworfen, für das Selbstbild Roms in Anschlag gebracht und in einem aemulatio-Verhältnis zu Griechenland und Ägypten gesehen. Interpretiert werden Texte von Plautus, Lukrez, Varro, Cicero, Caesar, Vitruv, Vergil, Livius, Ovid, Pomponius Mela, Plinius d.Ä., Sueton, Censorinus und Macrobius; ergänzend herangezogen werden motivisch relevante Passagen bei Hesiod, (Ps.-)Aischylos, Xenophon, Hekataios, Geminos, Plutarch, Iambulos, Lukian und Alkiphron. (shrink)

Die Beiträge des Bandes befassen sich in disziplinärer und interdisziplinärer Perspektive aus Literaturwissenschaft, Kunstgeschichte und Musikwissenschaft mit den Ästhetiken pluraler Autorschaft. Der Band zielt darauf, plurale Autorschaft in der Vormoderne als Koordinate einer Anderen Ästhetik zu erschließen und kulturgeschichtlich zu kontextualisieren. Dabei fokussiert der Band zwei Leitfragen: Welche Formen pluraler Autorschaft gibt es in der Vormoderne, und wie werden diese gemeinschaftlichen Schaffensprozesse ästhetischer Akte und Artefakte reflektiert? Wie wirken sich gemeinschaftliche Schaffensprozesse auf die ästhetische Faktur sowie die Funktion, Bedeutung und (...) Rezeption eines Artefakts aus? Die zweite Frage schließt Aspekte wie die materielle Produktion von Texten und Bildern ebenso ein wie etwa den Status anonymer Werke und Referenzen auf göttliche Co-Autorschaft. Die Beiträge untersuchen den historischen Mehrwert gemeinschaftlicher Autorschaft, wobei sie auch Paratextualität und Intermedialität sowie ökonomische Erwägungen bei der Produktion und Rezeption ästhetischer Artefakte berücksichtigen. (shrink)