The operon model and scientific explanation

dc.contributor.authorMelinda Fagan
dc.creatormel.fagan@utah.edu
dc.date.accessioned2021-01-29T16:20:23Z
dc.date.available2021-01-29T16:20:23Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.description.abstractIt is widely assumed that mechanistic explanations are causal explanations. Many prominent new mechanists endorse interventionism as the correct analysis of explanatory causal models in biology and other fields. This article argues that interventionism is not entirely satisfactory in this regard. A case study of Jacob and Monod’s operon model shows that at least some important mechanistic explanations in biology present significant contrasts with the interventionist account. This result motivates a more inclusive approach to mechanistic explanation, allowing for noncausal aspects.
dc.formattalk
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1086/687940
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2022/26218
dc.relation.ispartofseries6; Perspectivism across the Sciences
dc.relation.isversionofDownstream publication: Fagan, Melinda. (2016) "Interventionist Omissions: A Critical Case Study of Mechanistic Explanation in Biology." Philosophy of Science 83(5), 1082-1097.
dc.subjectmodern, contemporary
dc.subjectstructure of theories, pluralism
dc.subjectbiology, molecular biology, genetics
dc.subjectthe same model that supports multiple explanation --> pluralism
dc.titleThe operon model and scientific explanation
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
The operon model and scientific explanation.pdf
Size:
56.87 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Collections
If you need an accessible version of this item, please email your request to iusw@iu.edu so that they may create one and provide it to you.