D'Hombres Emmanuel
Faculté de Philosophie and UMR Sphere 7219, Université catholique de Lyon, 25 rue du Plat, 69002 Lyon, France.
J Hist Biol. 2012 Spring;45(1):3-31. doi: 10.1007/s10739-010-9256-2.
The notion of the 'division of physiological labour' is today an outdated relic in the history of science. This contrasts with the fate of another notion, which was so frequently paired with the division of physiological labour, which is the concept of 'morphological differentiation.' This is one of the elementary modal concepts of ontogenesis. In this paper, we intend to target the problems and causes that gradually led biologists to combine these two notions during the 19th century, and to progressively dissociate them, retaining only the concept of differentiation by the early 20th century. We shall adhere to the following: 1. The primitive economic concept of the division of labour is not a descriptive notion denoting a type of organisation of labour, but an etiological one: the idea of a causal relationship between this type of organization and the improvement of the whole. 2. This concept rapidly interested naturalists such as Henri Milne-Edwards, who were keen to find a rational ground for hierarchizing living forms based on anatomical complexity. 3. The validation of this notion in the realms of biology was subject to at least two conditions which were far from being fully satisfied. This did not prevent, however, the initial success of the concept of the division of physiological labour during the second half of the 19th century. 4. Finally, the gradual disqualification, within the Darwinian theoretical context, of the conception of an intrinsic hierarchical rank of organisms, led to a lack of interest in the concept of the physiological division of labour, at least in its non-Darwinian and non-ecological variant (the link between the division of labour within an organism and organic perfection).
“生理分工”这一概念在当今科学史上已是过时的遗迹。这与另一个概念的命运形成了对比,该概念常与生理分工相提并论,即“形态分化”概念。这是个体发育的基本模态概念之一。在本文中,我们旨在探讨在19世纪逐渐促使生物学家将这两个概念结合起来,随后又逐渐将它们分离,到20世纪初仅保留分化概念的问题及原因。我们将遵循以下几点:1. 分工的原始经济概念并非表示一种劳动组织类型的描述性概念,而是一种病因学概念:即这种组织类型与整体改善之间因果关系的概念。2. 这一概念很快引起了像亨利·米尔恩 - 爱德华兹这样的博物学家的兴趣,他们热衷于为基于解剖学复杂性对生物形态进行分级找到合理依据。3. 这一概念在生物学领域的验证至少受制于两个远未完全满足的条件。然而,这并未妨碍生理分工概念在19世纪下半叶取得初步成功。4. 最后,在达尔文理论背景下,生物内在等级观念逐渐失宠,导致人们对生理分工概念兴趣索然,至少对其非达尔文主义和非生态学变体(生物体内部分工与机体完善之间的联系)是如此。