Department of Philosophy, School of European Culture and Languages, University of Kent, Canterbury, CT2 7NZ, UK.
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2021 Oct;89:155-163. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.08.014. Epub 2021 Aug 26.
Historiographical analyses of the development of genetics in the first decade of the 20th century have been to a great extent framed in the context of the Mendelian-Biometrician controversy. Much has been discussed on the nature, origin, development, and legacy of the controversy. However, such a framework is becoming less useful and fruitful. This paper challenges the traditional historiography framed by the Mendelian-Biometrician distinction. It argues that the Mendelian-Biometrician distinction fails to reflect the theoretical and methodological diversity in the controversy. It also argues that the Mendelian-Biometrician distinction is not helpful to make a full understanding of the development of genetics in the first decade of the twentieth century.
20 世纪初遗传学发展的编史学分析在很大程度上是在孟德尔-生物统计学家争议的背景下进行的。关于这场争议的性质、起源、发展和遗产，已经讨论了很多。然而，这种框架变得越来越没有用处和成效。本文挑战了以孟德尔-生物统计学家区分来构建的传统编史学。它认为，孟德尔-生物统计学家的区分未能反映争议中的理论和方法多样性。它还认为，孟德尔-生物统计学家的区分无助于全面理解 20 世纪初遗传学的发展。
