Doctoral Dissertation Research: Spontaneous Generation Controversies: Scientific Politics, Evolution, and Molecular Theories

9320251 Geison自发生成-活细胞可以从惰性物质“自发”发展的理论-有着悠久的争议历史。 自19世纪以来的“正确”观点是自发生成不会发生。 然而，除非在宇宙历史中有生命自发产生的时刻，否则进化论者面临两种选择：神的干预或“生命”物质的存在。 虽然这两种选择都与进化论不一致，但它们隐含地破坏了进化论，至少在第一种选择中，有利于神创论者。 如果神至少要干预一次才能创造生命，那么是什么阻止了神再次干预来指导物种的发展呢？ 那么，生物学家是如何如此积极地工作来反驳自然发生的呢？ 这是詹姆斯·斯特里克在杰拉尔德·盖森博士的指导下在他的博士论文中研究的问题。 斯特里克先生发现，英国的自发生成争议为19世纪生物学理论发展的许多领域提供了一个独特的窗口。 这些领域包括遗传、发育、进化、世代和细胞理论的生物学解释。 关于自发生成的争论揭示了所有这些领域是如何彻底地被纳入一个单一的问题复杂性之中，其程度超过了以前所认识到的程度。 此外，生物学和物理学中关于分子的性质及其作为生命最简单元素的作用的观点在这一时期经历了迅速的变化，例如关于布朗运动和布朗的“活性分子”的意义的争论。“这是几乎完全被忽视的复杂问题的一个组成部分。 任何试图解释为什么自发生成在1880年后如此果断地失去了青睐的尝试都必须探索所有这些支持自发生成理论的支柱思想。 医学界和实验生物学项目之间的机构权力转移也在自发生成理论的消亡中发挥了重要作用。 在这一时期，达尔文的“X俱乐部”（X-club）为了控制英国科学界的声望和权力，采取了一些修辞策略，通过积极地使进化论与传统上联系在一起的自然发生学说脱离开来，使进化论更加受人尊敬。 为了进行这项研究，斯特里克先生正在研究美国、英国和法国的档案，这些国家是这一问题的科学工作中心。 ***

9320251 Geison Spontaneous generation--the theory that living cells can "spontaneously" develop from inert matter--has had a long, controversial history. The "correct" view since the 19th century is that spontaneous generation does not occur. Yet, unless there was some point in the history of the universe in which spontaneous generation of life occurred, then evolutionists are confronted with two options: divine intervention or the existence of "vital" matter. While neither of these options are inconsistent with evolution, they implicitly undermine evolutionary theory and, at least in the first option, play into the hands of creationists. If a god had to intervene at least once to create life, what prevents that god from intervening again to direct the development of species? So how is it that biologists have worked so energetically to disprove spontaneous generation? This is the issue that James Strick, under the direction of Dr. Gerald Geison, is examining in his doctoral dissertation. Mr. Strick has found that the spontaneous generation controversies in Britain offer a unique window into many areas of biological theory developing in the 19th century. These areas include biological explanations of inheritance, development, evolution, generation and cell theory. The debates over spontaneous generation reveal how thoroughly entwined into a single problem complex all these areas were, to a greater extent than has been appreciated previously. In addition, ideas in biology and physics about the nature of molecules and their role as simplest elements of life underwent rapid change during this period, exemplified by the debate over the significance of Brownian motion and Brown's "active molecules." This was an integral strand of the problem complex which has been almost totally ignored. Any attempt to explain why spontaneous generation lost favor so decisively after 1880 must explore all of these clusters of ideas which were pillars of support for sponta neous generation theories. Shifts in institutional power between the medical community and programs in experimental biology also played a major part in the demise of spontaneous generation theories. The maneuvering for control of prestige and power in British science by the Darwinian "X-club" during this period involved rhetorical strategies to make evolutionary theory more respectable by actively disengaging it from the traditionally linked doctrine of spontaneous generation. In order to undertake this study, Mr. Strick is examining archives in the United States, Great Britain and France--the centers of scientific work on this issue. ***