History and Philosophy of 20th Century Developmental Biology

Maienschein发育生物学最近庆祝了其作为生物学专业的百年诞辰。然而，它在创立时提出的问题今天仍然有待回答。然而，根据《科学》杂志的一篇百年报告，发育生物学非但没有灰心丧气，反而“正处于鼎盛时期。事实上，随着研究人员深入了解单个受精的卵细胞如何经历一系列复杂而美丽的变化，从而创造出整个有机体，该领域的兴奋和希望从未像现在这样令人兴奋。”根据这笔拨款，Maienschein博士正在分析过去一个世纪来解决发展中心问题的方式的变化。在这些生物学家试图回答的类似问题的背景下，迈恩谢恩博士正在研究在方法、方法、技术和不同的基本假设方面存在显著差异的细节是如何将研究人员推向不同的方向。她特别关注形态发生(结构变化如何发展)的问题，以及作为许多讨论基础的“组织”概念的变化。聚焦和比较选定的例子，阐明了辩论的转变方式，以及伴随转变而来的一些潜在的认识论假设。在这个项目中，Maienschein博士将检验这一假设，即在这个生物群落中存在相互竞争的思维方式。她认为，尤其是出现了认识论风格，每一种风格都分享着基本的认识论假设，即什么将被算作知识，以及如何证明知识主张是正确的。这些认知风格定义和指导科学工作，并嵌入上下文，而每一组中的那些共享关于科学本质的基本假设模式。

Maienschein Developmental biology has recently celebrated its centenary as a specialty within biology. The problems that were set forth at its creation, however, remain to be answered today. Far from being discouraged, however, developmental biology is, according to a centenary report in Science magazine, "basking in its prime. Indeed the excitement and promise of the field have never been greater, as researchers close in on the secret of how a single fertilized egg cell goes through the complex and beautifully orchestrated series of changes that create and entire organism." Under this grant, Dr. Maienschein is analyzing the changing ways the central issues of development have been addressed over the past century. Against a background of similar questions that these biologists were trying to answer, Dr. Maienschein is looking at how the significantly different details in approaches, methods, techniques, and different basic assumptions have pushed and pulled researchers in a variety of directions. She is focusing on issues of morphogenesis (how structural changes develop) in particular, and on the changing concepts of "organization" which have underpinned many of the discussions. Spotlighting and comparing selected examples illuminate the way the debates have shifted and some of the underlying epistemological assumptions that have accompanied the shifts. In this project, Dr. Maienschein will test the hypothesis that there have existed competing styles of thinking within this biological community. In particular, she argues, there emerge epistemic styles, each sharing fundamental epistemological assumptions about what will count as knowledge and how to warrant knowledge claims. These epistemic styles define and direct the scientific work and are contextually embedded, while those in each group share patterns of basic assumptions about the nature of science.