Regelmann J P
Acta Biotheor. 1982;31A(4):205-35. doi: 10.1007/BF02627650.
In the first half of the 20th century neo-Kantianism in a broad sense proved itself the main conceptual and methodological background of the central European biology. As such it contributed much to the victory on the typological, idealistic-morphological and psycho-vitalistic interpretations of life. On the other hand it could not give tools to the biologists for working out a strictly darwinian evolution theory. Kant's theory of organism was conceived without evolution as a theory of the internal functionality of the organism. There was only some 'play' with the evolutionary differentiation of the species. Since then the disputes around the work of August Weismann, a synthetical evolution theory which is now behind time, arose. This theory developed from coinciding claims, elaborated by geneticists, mathematicians, and by biologists studying development, natural history and systematics. This was done under a strong influence of marxist ideas. Through the interweaving of such different approaches it was possible for this evolutionary synthesis to influence successfully the development of evolution research during more than 40 years. Philosophically speaking modern evolution theory means therefore an aversion, even a positive abolition of Kantian positions. A number of biologists however--as L. von Bertalanffy--refused to adhere to a misinterpreted Kantian methodology and oriented themselves to an approach via system theory, which obtained a place in evolution research. In fact this is a Kantian approach as well. They only repeated the Kantian dilemma of the evolution which can also be found in Lamarck and Hegel. The system theory of the functionality of the organism never reaches to the level of the evolving species, but remains always on the level of epigenetic thinking, because of its philosophical origin. This paper points out the consequences of this still current dilemma. At the same time an all-enclosing reflection on the methodological, epistemological and the important historical questions of evolutionary biology in its scientific context is recommended.
在20世纪上半叶，广义的新康德主义证明自身是中欧生物学的主要概念和方法论背景。就此而言，它为战胜对生命的类型学、唯心主义形态学和心理活力论解释做出了很大贡献。另一方面，它无法为生物学家提供工具来制定严格的达尔文进化论。康德的有机体理论是在没有进化概念的情况下构想出来的，是一种关于有机体内部功能的理论。当时只是对物种的进化分化进行了一些“探讨”。从那时起，围绕奥古斯特·魏斯曼的工作出现了争议，他的综合进化论如今已过时。该理论源自遗传学家、数学家以及研究发育、自然史和系统学的生物学家所提出的相互契合的主张。这是在马克思主义思想的强烈影响下完成的。通过这些不同方法的交织，这种进化综合得以在40多年里成功影响进化研究的发展。因此，从哲学角度讲，现代进化论意味着对康德立场的厌恶，甚至是积极摒弃。然而，一些生物学家——比如L. 冯·贝塔朗菲——拒绝遵循被误解的康德方法论，而是转向通过系统论的方法，系统论在进化研究中获得了一席之地。实际上，这也是一种康德式的方法。他们只是重复了康德在进化论上的困境，这种困境在拉马克和黑格尔那里也能找到。有机体功能的系统论由于其哲学渊源，始终无法达到进化物种的层面，而一直停留在表观遗传学思维的层面。本文指出了这种至今仍然存在的困境的后果。同时，建议在科学背景下对进化生物学的方法论、认识论及重要历史问题进行全面反思。
