RESUMEN: Abir-Am ha criticado la visión estándar de que la Fundación Rockefeller (FR) jugó un papel central en el surgimiento de la biología molecular durante la década de 1960. En su opinión, la FR aceleró la molecularización de las ciencias de la vida, pero no intervino de manera directa en el surgimiento de la biología molecular como disciplina. Aquí sostengo que esta crítica tiene consecuencias mayores a las que sospechó su autora y muestro que la tesis de la centralidad de (...) la FR en el desarrollo de la biología molecular no se puede desmantelar sin alterar también la visión de la biologia molecular como una disciplina orientada a la resolución de problemas predefinidos.ABSTRACT: Abir-Am has critiqued the standard view that the Rockefeller Foundation (RF) played a central role in the development of molecular biology during the 1960s. In her view, the RF accelerated the molecularization of the life sciences, but it did not directly contribute to building molecular biology’s disciplinary identity. Here I argue that Abir-Am’s critique has more consequences than she envisioned, and I show that the thesis of the centrality of the RF cannot be dismantled without also altering the view of molecular biology as a field oriented towards the solution of predefined problems. (shrink)

Although the interdisciplinary nature of contemporary biological sciences has been addressed by philosophers, historians, and sociologists of science, the different ways in which engineering concepts and methods have been applied in biology have been somewhat neglected. We examine - using the mechanistic philosophy of science as an analytic springboard - the transfer of network methods from engineering to biology through the cases of two biology laboratories operating at the California Institute of Technology. The two laboratories study gene regulatory networks, but (...) in remarkably different ways. The research strategy of the Davidson lab fits squarely into the traditional mechanist philosophy in its aim to decompose and reconstruct, in detail, gene regulatory networks of a chosen model organism. In contrast, the Elowitz lab constructs minimal models that do not attempt to represent any particular naturally evolved genetic circuits. Instead, it studies the principles of gene regulation through a template-based approach that is applicable to any kinds of networks, whether biological or not. We call for the mechanists to consider whether the latter approach can be accommodated by the mechanistic approach, and what kinds of modifications it would imply for the mechanistic paradigm of explanation, if it were to address modelling more generally. (shrink)