Modern Bioscience and the Concept of Life

导言拟议的两年研究项目将产生由一个主要的大学出版社出版的历史和哲学分析的“生命”在现代生物物理学的概念。其目的将是照亮这一概念，通过研究其历史发展在现代生物学，特别是因为这已经表现在生物物理学和分子biology.Intellectual MeritAlthough有调查治疗的概念，生命和“活力”的文献中，有相当大的需要仔细分析的概念，生命在现代实验生物学。拟议的项目不同于以前的“非常规”调查（例如Hall，1969年），也没有被最近的讨论所复制（Hunter 2000; Durr等人，2002; Maienschein 2003）。该项目将从科学，历史，制度，哲学和伦理的角度来处理这一概念的历史。这样一个概念的历史是必要的，以更充分地定位许多目前的辩论，如胚胎干细胞研究，生命终结问题，克隆问题，以及与现代生命科学的戏剧性发展有关的其他问题。这些问题是由于对细胞生物学、分子遗传学、神经生理学和发育生物学的基本过程的理解和技术控制造成的。拟议的研究将提供有限的历史分析的“生物物理”的传统在生命科学，它将阐明这些发展和现代“分子”生物学的生命概念之间的联系。作为第二个主要目标，该项目将在英美生物学的“分析”哲学中对这些问题的讨论与那些发生在大陆生物学中追溯到康德遗产的讨论之间建立一个接口。这种传统的相互联系将在这些生物学哲学的替代方法之间展开比现在更富有成果的讨论。在这方面，研究将在传统之间架起一座桥梁。更广泛的影响PI进行这项研究的基本动机与围绕知识问题的社会和公共政策问题有关。毫无疑问，在人类和非人类世界中，关于“活着”意味着什么的相互竞争的概念，是当前公众对涉及生命科学、伦理、宗教和公共政策交叉问题的辩论的中心。通常情况下，目前各方只是各执一词，除了一个直截了当的政治解决方案外，看不到任何解决方案。本书的分析将试图通过对这些讨论中起作用的中心概念进行详细的历史和哲学分析，来缓和（如果不一定解决）这一讨论。虽然最近有一些著作发展了一些类似的主题（Maienschein 2003），但这项工作旨在以更全面的历史视角发展这些问题，并涉及一些基本的哲学问题，这些问题是“分析”和“欧陆”视角之间的比较讨论可以理想地提供的。理想的是创造一个更富有成效的对话，跨越传统。由此产生的工作应该对科学史学家、生物伦理学家、哲学家、神学家和公共政策专家有用。它应该是有价值的任何谁是参与教学的更广泛的影响，研究在分子生物学，发育生物学，特别是在学院和大学的水平。

IntroductionThe proposed two-year research project will produce for publication by a major university press a historical and philosophical analysis of the conception of "life" in modern biophysics. The intent will be to illuminate this concept through a study of its historical development in modern biology, particularly as this has been manifest in biophysics and molecular biology.Intellectual MeritAlthough there have been survey treatments of the notion of life and "vitality" in the literature, there is considerable need for a careful analysis of the conception of life in modern experimental biology. The proposed project is different from prior "encyclopedic" surveys (e.g. Hall, 1969), and it is not replicated by more recent discussions (Hunter 2000; Durr et al. 2002; Maienschein 2003). The project will deal with this conceptual history from a combined scientific, historical, institutional, philosophical, and ethical perspective. Such a conceptual history is needed to position more adequately many of the current debates over such issues as embryonic stem-cell research, end-of-life issues, the question of cloning, and other issues associated with the dramatic developments of modern life science. These issues have resulted from the understanding and technological control of fundamental processes of cellular biology, molecular genetics, neurophysiology, and developmental biology. The proposed study will supply both a limited historical analysis of the "biophysical" tradition in the life sciences, and it will illuminate the linkages between these developments and the conception of life in modern "molecular" biology. As a second major goal, the project will develop an interface between discussions of these issues in Anglo-American "analytic" philosophy of biology, and those occurring in Continental biology reaching back to the heritage of Kant. This interfacing of traditions will develop a more fruitful discussion than now exists between these alternative approaches to the philosophy of biology. In this respect the study will form a bridge between traditions.Broader ImpactsThe PI's fundamental motivation for undertaking this research is tied to the social and public policy issues that surround the intellectual questions. It is unquestionable that competing notions of what it means to be "alive," both in the human and non-human world, are at the center of current public debates over several issues involve the intersection of the life sciences, ethics, religion and public policy. Typically parties at present simply talk past one another, and no resolution is in sight beyond a blunt political one. The analysis developed by this book project will seek to moderate, if not necessarily resolve, this discussion by supplying a detailed historical and philosophical analysis of the central concept in play in these discussions. Although there are some recent works that have developed some similar themes (Maienschein 2003), this work is intended to develop the issues with a fuller historical perspective, and engage some of fundamental philosophical issues that a comparative discussion between "analytic" and "Continental" perspectives can ideally provide. The ideal is to create a more fruitful dialogue across traditions. The resultant work should be of use to historians of science, bioethicists, philosophers, theologians, and public policy experts. It should be of value to any who are involved in teaching about the wider impact of research in molecular biology, and developmental biology, particularly at the college and university levels.