Year: 2015
Type: dissertation
Abstract: The aim of this thesis is to compare Kuhn's historiographical framework that he implemented \non the history of physics with the history of biology to discover if it is meaningful to discuss \nbiology from the perspective of a Kuhnian revolutionary historiography. Along with this \nbroader aim, there is a secondary and more concrete reason to investigate if there is any merit \nin discussing Theodosius Dobzhansky's Genetics and the Origins of Species (1937) as a \nrevolutionary text in the sense that it is similar to works like Charles Lyell’s Principles of \nGeology (1830), Isaac Newton’s Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy (1867) and \nAntoine Lavoisier’s Elementary Treatise of Chemistry (1789) which lay the foundations to \nmodern science in their respective fields. This inquiry will also address the status of Charles \nDarwin's On the Origin of Species (1859) as a revolutionary text as the significance of his \nwork has been the center of much hype and historically questionable claims. By the end of \nthis paper I wish to answer the question of whether a Kuhnian historiography is interesting to \nimplement to biology. Is it able to shed light to new inquiries and interesting nuances about \nbiology and does it help to clarify the still open question of a Darwinian revolution?
Author: Anna Elise Rohtmets
Language: English
Subfield: History and Philosophy of Science
Field: Arts and Humanities
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W1888182210