Kingsland Sharon E
Department of History of Science and Technology, Johns Hopkins University, 3505 North Charles Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21218, USA.
Isis. 2007 Sep;98(3):468-88. doi: 10.1086/521153.
A rereading of the American scientific literature on sex determination from 1902 to 1926 leads to a different understanding of the construction of the Mendelian-chromosome theory after 1910. There was significant intellectual continuity, which has not been properly appreciated, underlying this scientific "revolution." After reexamining the relationship between the ideas of key scientists, in particular Edmund B. Wilson and Thomas Hunt Morgan, I argue that, contrary to the historical literature, Wilson and Morgan did not adopt opposing views on Mendelism and sex determination. Rather, each preferred a non-Mendelian explanation of the determination of sex. Around 1910, both integrated the Mendelian and non-Mendelian theories to create a synthetic theory. One problem was the need to avoid an overly deterministic view of sex while also accepting the validity of Mendelism. Morgan's discovery of mutations on the X chromosome takes on different significance when set in the context of the debate about sex determination, and Calvin Bridges's work on sex determination is better seen as a development of Morgan's ideas, rather than a departure from them. Conclusions point to the role of synthesis within fields as a way to advance scientific theories and reflect on the relationship between synthesis and explanatory "pluralism" in biology.
重新研读1902年至1926年间美国关于性别决定的科学文献,会对1910年后孟德尔 - 染色体理论的构建产生不同的理解。在这场科学“革命”的背后,存在着一种尚未得到充分认识的显著知识连续性。在重新审视了关键科学家,特别是埃德蒙·B·威尔逊和托马斯·亨特·摩根的观点之间的关系后,我认为,与历史文献不同,威尔逊和摩根在孟德尔主义和性别决定问题上并非持有相反观点。相反,两人都倾向于用非孟德尔式的解释来说明性别决定。大约在1910年,两人都将孟德尔理论和非孟德尔理论整合起来,创建了一个综合理论。一个问题是,既要避免对性别持有过于决定论的观点,同时又要接受孟德尔主义的有效性。当置于关于性别决定的争论背景中时,摩根在X染色体上发现突变就具有了不同的意义,而且加尔文·布里奇斯关于性别决定的研究,更应被视为摩根观点的发展,而非与之背离。结论指出了学科内部综合在推进科学理论发展中的作用,并反思了综合与生物学中解释性“多元主义”之间的关系。