Programas de investigación y estrategias metodológicas: cuestiones conceptuales e históricas
Keywords:
Palabras clave, Filosofía de la bioquímica, Análisis de control metabólico, Escuela de CambridgeAbstract
En los años veinte del siglo pasado se constituye lo que luego se llamó la escuela de Cambridge en bioquímica. Bajo el liderazgo de Frederick Gowland Hopkins este grupo tenía como objetivo primario la consolidación de la naciente bioquímica. Una característica particular de este grupo fue el intento explícito de vincular el trabajo científico con la discusión filosófica. Sin embargo, algunos historiadores como Nils Roll-Hansen (1984) han cuestionado en duros términos la manera en la cual estos científicos apelaban a la filosofía. En particular Roll-Hansen ha sugerido que los aspectos filosóficos del trabajo de estos investigadores tendrían un mero carácter propagandístico vinculado con el proyecto de la constitución de la bioquímica como una disciplina.
En este trabajo voy a defender que es posible considerar a los principios filosóficos presentados por la escuela de Cambridge como algo más que una mera propaganda para un proyecto institucional. Para esto voy a comparar la relación entre los principios filosóficos y trabajo metodológico propuesto por la escuela de Cambridge con una propuesta contemporánea: el Análisis de Control Metabólico, una perspectiva en el estudio de la bioquímica cuyo trabajo metodológico se suele defender apelando a “principios filosóficos”. A pesar de la distancia temporal entre ambas escuelas, tanto la actitud de apelar a principios filosóficos como el campo de estudio científico son semejantes.
Abstract
In the twenties of the last century, the Cambridge school in biochemistry was established. Under the leadership of Frederick Gowland Hopkins this group had as its primary objective the consolidation of a new science: biochemistry. A particular feature of this group was the explicit attempt to link scientific work with philosophical discussion. However, some historians like Nils Roll-Hansen (1984) have harshly questioned the way in which these scientists appealed to philosophy. In particular Roll-Hansen has suggested that the philosophical aspects of the work of these researchers would have to be considered as propaganda, motivated by attempt stablish the biochemistry as a discipline.
In this paper I am going to defend that it is possible to consider the philosophical principles presented by the Cambridge school as something more than a propaganda for an institutional project. To this end I am going to compare the relationship between the philosophical principles and methodological work proposed by the Cambridge school with a contemporary proposal: the Metabolic Control Analysis, a perspective in the study of biochemistry whose methodological work is usually defended by appealing to “philosophical principles”. Despite the temporal distance between the two schools, both the attitude of appealing to philosophical principles and their field of scientific study are similar.
Key Words: Philosophy of Biochemistry; Metabolic Control Analysis; Cambridge School
Downloads
References
Abir-Am, P. G. (1991). The philosophical background of Joseph Needham a work in chemical embryology. en A conceptual history of modern embryology, pages 159–180. Springer.
Allen, G. (1975). Life Science in the 20th Century. New York, 51, 299.
Allen, G. (2005). Mechanism, vitalism and organicism in late nineteenth and twentieth-century biology: the importance of historical context. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 36(2):261–283.
Baldwin, E. (1937) An introduction to comparative biochemistry, Cambridge University Press.
Cassirer, E. (1986) El problema del conocimiento en la filosofía y en la ciencia modernas. Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Canguilhem, G. (1976). El conocimiento de la vida. Anagrama.
Cornish-Bowden, A. and Hofmeyr, J. (2005). Enzymes in context: Kinetic characterization of enzymes for systems biology. The Biochemist, 27(1):11–13.
Fell, D. A. (1992). Metabolic control analysis: a survey of its theoretical and experimental development. Biochemical Journal, 286(Pt 2):313.
Fruton, J. (1973). The emergence of biochemistry. Science,, Vol. 192:327–334.
Garcia, P. Computer simulations and experiments: in vivo–in vitro conditions in biochemistry. Found Chem 17, 49–65 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-015-9215-2
Gilbert, S. F. y Sarkar, S. (2000). Embracing complexity: organicism for the 21st century. Developmental dynamics: an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists, 219(1):1–9.
Goldsmith, M. (1995). Joseph Needham: 20th-century renaissance man. Number 28. Unesco.
Hofmeyr, J.-H. S. (2001). Metabolic control analysis in a nutshell. In Proceedings of the 2nd International conference on systems biology, pages 291–300. Omnipress Madison, Wisconsin.
Holmes, E. (1937) Metabolism of living tissue, Cambridge University Press
Hopkins, F. G. (1913). The dynamic side of biochemistry. Nature, 92(2294):213– 223.
Kamminga, H. (1997). Frederick Gowland Hopkins and the unification of biochemistry. 22:184–7.
Kamminga, H. and Weatherall, M. W. (1996). The making of a biochemist. i: Frederick Gowland Hopkins’ construction of dynamic biochemistry. Medical history, 40(3):269–292.
Kohler, R. E. (1973). The enzyme theory and the origin of biochemistry. Isis, pages 181–196.
Mayr, E. (2016) ¿Cuál es el significado de “vida”? en Bedau, M; Cleland, C.: La esencia de la vida, Fondo de Cultura Económica, México, (187-213).
Mendes, P. (1994). Computer simulation of the dynamics of biochemical pathways. PhD thesis, University of Wales, Aberystwyth.
Moreno-Sánchez, R., Saavedra, E., Rodríguez-Enríquez, S., and Olín-Sandoval, V. (2008). Metabolic control analysis: a tool for designing strategies to manipulate metabolic pathways. BioMed Research International, 2008.
Needham, J. (1928). Organicism in biology. Philosophy, 3(9):29–40.
Needham, J. (1931). Chemical embryology, volume 3. University Press Cambridge.
Roll-Hansen, N. (1984). E.S. Russell and J.H. Woodger: the failure of two twentieth century opponents of mechanistic biology. Journal of the History of Biology, 17(3):399–428.
Schilpp, P. A. (2004). The philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead. Open Court, New York. OCLC: 912329657.
Schroder, H. (1992). Classics revisited: Joseph Needham: ‘chemical embryology’-Cambridge 1931. Placenta, 13(1), 91-94.
Whitehead, A. N. (1920/1986), The Concept of Nature, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Whitehead, A. N. (1925/1948). Science and the modern world. Pelican Mentor, New York
Whitehead, A. N (1929/1985), Process and Reality, (Gifford Lectures 1927–28), New York: Macmillan. Corrected edition, David Ray Griffin & Donald W. Sherburne (eds.), New York: The Free Press,
Woodger, J. H. (1929). Biological principles: A critical study. Routledge.
Woodger, J. H. (1930a). The "concept of organism" and the relation between embryology and genetics. Part I. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 5(1), 1-22.
Woodger, J. H. (1930b). The "Concept of Organism" and the Relation Between Embryology and Genetics Part. II. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 5(4), 438-463.
Woodger, J. H. (1930c). The "Concept of Organism" and the Relation Between Embryology and Genetics Part. III. The Quarterly Review of Biology 1931 6:2, 178-207.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
ARK
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Páginas de Filosofía
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
