Is Biology a Provincial Science?
- 1 December 1975
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Philosophy of Science
- Vol. 42 (4) , 428-447
- https://doi.org/10.1086/288662
Abstract
My thesis is that biology is most plausibly regarded as a universal, as distinct from a provincial, science. First, I develop the general notion of a provincial science, formulate three criteria for applying the concept, and present brief examples illustrating their use. Second, I argue that a consideration of population genetics as a characteristic example of a basic biological theory strengthens the prior presumption that biology is not a provincial science. Finally, I examine two arguments to the effect that biology is a provincial science. The first concerns biology's exclusively terrestrial evidence base, the second the logical character of its laws. I introduce considerations that weaken the persuasiveness of the first argument and then show that the second one rests upon a false premise and so should be rejected.Keywords
This publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit:
- Toward a Universal Biology: The Search for Life on MarsScience News, 1971
- Are there laws in biology?Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 1970
- The Structure of ScienceAmerican Journal of Physics, 1961
- The Birth of a New PhysicsAmerican Journal of Physics, 1960
- Exobiology: Approaches to Life beyond the EarthScience, 1960