Department of Genetics and Program for the History and Philosophy of Science, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 91904 Jerusalem, Israel.
Hist Philos Life Sci. 2012;34(3):373-90.
The debate between A.I. Oparin's heterotrophic proposal of the origin of life and H.J. Muller's suggestion that what may be considered a posteriori the beginning of life, was an autocatalytic, replicative gene, is analyzed. Although both recognized that what was needed was an interacting system contiguous in space and time, it is now rarely mentioned that this scientific confrontation went on for several decades against the background of intense ideological issues, political tensions, and scientific developments that include the rise and demise of Lysenkoism, on the one hand, and, on the other, the establishment of neoDarwinism and the birth of molecular biology. Whereas for Oparin life was the outcome of the step-wise slow process of precellular evolution in which membrane-bounded polymolecular systems played a key role, Muller argued that life started with the appearance of the first nucleic-acid (DNA) molecule in the primitive oceans. Oparin and Muller came from different scientific backgrounds and almost opposite intellectual traditions, so their common interest in the origin of life did nothing to assuage their opposing views, which as argued soon became part of the debates that took place within the framework of intense ideological confrontations.
奥巴林的异养生命起源假说与穆勒的后知后觉生命起源假说(即认为生命的起源可能是具有自我复制功能的基因)之间的争论,受到了分析。尽管两者都认识到需要的是一个在空间和时间上相互作用的连续系统,但现在很少有人提到,这场科学对抗在意识形态问题、政治紧张局势和科学发展的背景下持续了几十年,其中包括李森科主义的兴起和衰落,以及新达尔文主义的建立和分子生物学的诞生。奥巴林认为生命是细胞前进化的逐步缓慢过程的结果,其中膜结合的多分子系统起着关键作用;而穆勒则认为生命始于原始海洋中第一个核酸(DNA)分子的出现。奥巴林和穆勒来自不同的科学背景和几乎相反的知识传统,因此,他们对生命起源的共同兴趣并没有缓解他们的对立观点,正如争论所表明的那样,这些观点很快成为在激烈的意识形态对抗框架内进行的辩论的一部分。