Kamminga H
Department of History and Philosophy of Science, King's College (KQC), University of London, U.K.
Orig Life Evol Biosph. 1988;18(1-2):1-11. doi: 10.1007/BF01808777.
The structure of the history of scientific ideas on the origin of life, after Darwin's theory of evolution brought the problem into focus, is discussed. 19th-century theories in the mainstream of historical development already included some notion of chemical evolution. These theories were limited, however, by their reliance on a protoplasmic view of life, according to which the protoplasmic substance combines all vital properties. It was only when this holistic concept of protoplasm was abandoned that a clear distinction between different vital functions such as metabolism and replication was made. This led to two schools of thought in the origin of life field, one inspired by biochemistry and one by genetics. Oparin's theory, which was rooted in the metabolic traditions of biochemistry, provided a model which has had a lasting impact in methodological terms and which helped to transform the field from a largely theoretical one to an area of active research. Genetically based theories, on the other hand, had a delayed impact in this respect, because of long-lasting uncertainty regarding the structural basis of gene function.
在达尔文的进化论使生命起源问题成为焦点之后,对科学思想史结构进行了讨论。历史发展主流中的19世纪理论已经包含了一些化学进化的概念。然而,这些理论受到其对生命原生质观点的依赖的限制,根据这种观点,原生质物质结合了所有生命特性。只有当这种原生质的整体概念被摒弃时,才对新陈代谢和复制等不同生命功能进行了明确区分。这导致了生命起源领域的两种思想流派,一种受生物化学启发,另一种受遗传学启发。奥帕林的理论植根于生物化学的代谢传统,提供了一个在方法论方面产生持久影响的模型,并有助于将该领域从一个主要是理论性的领域转变为一个活跃的研究领域。另一方面,基于遗传学的理论在这方面的影响则较为滞后,因为基因功能的结构基础长期存在不确定性。