Scientific and Philosophical Concept of Species - Essay Example

Scientific and Philosophical Concept of Species By (Module and number) Scientific and Philosophical Conceptof Species Science and philosophy have some similarities and differences. One may say that science is a more rigid form of discipline than philosophy as the former involves experimentation and the truth must be duplicable (Reichenbach 1951, p. 303). On the other hand, philosophy had given way for the development of science as it started from the speculations done by the thinkers through the practice of philosophy (Gutting 2005, p. 1). That shows how philosophy is important as it serves as the root or the foundation of science. It may also mean that some concepts of science may be rethought of and solved with the help of philosophy. One of the concepts that are subjected to disambiguation and debate is the concept of species as it may have multiple meanings. In general, it is used in many ways but it pertains to subdivision or smaller parts of a whole. It is nominal or name given for the parts of a bigger group. For example, a square is considered as a rectangle though it differs from other forms of rectangles as it has four equal sides. Another example is spouse wherein there are various kinds of spouse like husband or wife (Parry and Hacker 1991, pp. 104-106). Basically, species is used for distinguishing particular subgroup from the others. When it comes to life sciences, species is defined based upon the discovery and theory of Charles Darwin which is about evolution. Species therefore when it comes to biological species concept popularized by Mayr. Species in biology then is the group of natural organisms that has the capacity to reproduce and interbreed and should be isolated from the existence of other groups and populations. The definition then tend to avoid two issues which are species mixing from unrelated by structurally similar and extreme separation of one species from the others. Population dynamics and genetics of organisms are then connected by the said definition as the concept of class was avoided to be intertwined with species. That definition is limiting as the bacteria are not included in that meaning of species. It is not then a problem as Mayr pointed out since the definition focused on preserving the gene pool and its harmony which is not essential for bacteria as those prokaryotes do not suffer from out-crossing (Auletta 2011, pp. 282-283). The definition may look like limiting, but Mayr got a point as bacteria do not reproduce sexually which primarily separate bacteria or prokaryotes from eukaryotes like animals and plants. As the definition of species is shown above, that can be rooted from Charles Darwin. From his Origin of Species until the latter biologists who worked on the evolution of organisms, they had created the phylogenetic analysis to compare and contrast the fossils discovered and the bodies of existing organisms in order to categorize them. Darwin and other biologists then believed in speciation to be the important factor in the specific differentiation of organisms from one another. It involves isolation of area or geographical isolation for the population to undergo limited gene exchange and reproduce. As time passed by, those populations then slowly change genetically especially when they have different habitats and natural selection occur. Once those factors have cumulative effects after generations, the product would be two different populations that cannot interbreed despite of their common ancestor (Jurmain et. al. 2009, pp. 101-102). Biological species is then rooted from the findings of Charles Darwin as he found the similarities in body structure among the fossils he found. He also stated the importance of the habitat and location restriction upon the reproduction of certain groups than through time may give rise to a different form of organism though morphologically related to the former species. The form of species is not just limited to the concept of biology, as it may also apply in other disciplines as well. Those are agamospecies, autapomorphic species, cladospecies, cohesion species, compilospecies, composite species, ecospecies, evolutionary species, genealogical concordance species, genic species, genetic species, hennigian species, intermodal species, morphospecies, non-dimensional species, nothospecies, phenospecies, phylogenetic taxon species, recognition species, reproductive competition species, successional species, taxonomic species, evolutionary significant unit, genotypic cluster or polythetic species, and least inclusive taxonomic unit (Wilkins 2006). Those are all various perceptions regarding species in the field of life sciences. Each concept of species will be briefly discussed in the succeeding paragraphs to provide the firm foundation on the definition of species. The first in the list is agamospecies. The very definition of that type of species manifests only to organisms that reproduce sexually from two parents and a particular scenario occur that created reproductive isolation. The outcome is having gamete fusion in order for the organisms to continue creating other organisms from the same population. They use to be clones with some differences in behavior, biochemistry and morphology (Claridge 2010, p. 97). In other words, agamospecies involves asexual lineages and they themselves are uniparental but descended from biparental organisms (Wilkins 2006). It involves organisms that have the capability to reproduce without the need of a partner though that ability is just a secondary feature. The next is autapomorphic species. It is also called monophyletic species as the concept revolves around the strict compliance on apomorphy and geography. Those organisms then are isolated on their location as they are the terminal in the evolution and received derived traits from ancestors (Wheeler 2012, p. 56). In short, those are the organisms that are part of the terminal lineage that inherited traits from their ancestors while being deemed to be the dead-end of the phylogenetic lineage (Wilkins 2006). Another concept of species is the cladospecies. It is then focused on the number of individual organisms which create a population of descendants that hare related to one another in terms of the ability to reproduce and they are separated from other organisms (Giacobini 1989, p. 71). It is located between two generations in the phylogenetic tree and when speciation occurs, the ancestral species come into extinction while giving rise to two new species (Wilkins 2006). The next one kind of species is cohesion species. The concept of that species shows the correlation between the community of reproducing organisms and the evolutionary lineage. The lineage boundaries then allow the rise of the factors that perpetuate the existence of reproductive communities. Cohesion mechanisms then create the patterns of the evolutionary lineages. With the fusion of the two concepts of species, the limitations set forth by those as separate forms are avoided (Howard and Berlocher 1998, p. 33). As the concept of species had been defined in the beginning of the paper, the dilemma is brought to light as the concept is problematic whether it pertains to the individual. The problem encountered involves both philosophy and biology in order to solve it. In particular, logic is used within the branch of philosophy to study the context of species. Despite of the multiple definitions of species presented, those are not enough to put an entity under a category. When it comes to logic, the term individual does not pertain to organism as it describes a specific object. It can assign systems at different stages of association like in humans. A person can be considered an individual although he is composed of cells and atoms. Also the object must be continuous in form. A good example is the use of analogy wherein United States of America is considered as an individual in the group of country states even though Canada and international waters surround it (Ghiselin 1974, p. 536). Truly, the concept of species then is somehow limiting. Species then is sometimes used interchangeably with individuals but they both differ from each other. Individuals as used by the lay people pertain to the unit of essence as a single entity while in science it pertains to the continuous entity that may take part in the population. It is related though with species as species pertains to the group or subdivision of continuous individuals that undergo mutation, selection and eventually evolution (Hull 1978, p. 336). It means that the concept of individual and species become intertwined and confusing. Once the concept is then reduced to pertain to specific entity, it may not include some essential topics that have some degree of importance. Probably the concept of species can be traced back in history. In history, it was shown that Charles Darwin started the concept of evolution that comes with the concept of species. He realized the importance of evolution when he started his studies at University of Cambridge where he became interested with marine invertebrates. He had that strong passion for natural sciences that led to his journey for five years with the ship HMS Beagle. He then went to Galapagos Island and observed the shells there and other fossils that led to his assumptions that supported the uniformitarian concept by Charles Lyell with his book The Principles of Geology (Stefoff 1998, p. 59). Possibly he had observed some patterns in the spiral growth of the shells that led to his deduction of evolution. The differences then of the shape of the shells may be attributed to evolution and function. Perhaps the differences in shell shape had been affected by the isolation, location, reproduction and function of those particular organisms (Raup 1966, p. 1185). The discovery of Charles Darwin then revolutionized the scientific community as majority of the people were shocked. The prevalent concept of origin in the time of Darwin was Creation which is connected with religious belief as conservative Christianity was prevalent in that time. The Creation then is based on the Scripture where God made the world in the Book of Genesis. He filled the land with plants of all kinds from trees to small plants that bear fruits. God saw those creations to be good. Water was then created next along with the animals. Birds fly in the sky while fishes and other marine animals were under the sea. The next he created were the land animals that roam the forest and those were of various kinds from livestock to boars (Wilkins Species, Kinds and Evolution 2006). With that said, people reacted violently upon the theory set forth by Darwin as it violated the prevailing belief. In response to the works of Darwin regarding the Theory of Evolution, several criticisms were thrown at him. Darwin received various satires, drawings and reviews regarding his works on evolution despite of his efforts to open up the possibility of the origin of organisms especially the human beings. The first criticisms assumed that Darwin got the idea of men coming from apes through the book Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation (Lindsey 2005, p. 152). Other critics like Huxley attacked Darwin and his friends regarding their propositions. In response, Owen and other scientists on the side of Darwin promoted the idea of evolution under the influence of an outside force or supernatural being. Even the former tutors of Darwin at Cambridge did not accept the idea of evolution. In contrast with the prevailing confusion, some liberal priests and members of the Church in England understood the evolution and natural selection as ways for God to create the creatures of the world. Those works of the liberal clergymen especially the published essays by the Anglicans were criticized by the Church after accusing Darwin for heresy. Despite of that confusion, some were able to deduce that evolution and natural selection are compatible with the church doctrine that promotes the so-called natural theology. A confrontation then occurred despite of the compatibility launched by certain groups. The confrontation occurred in front of the public audience wherein the Oxford Bishop Wilberforce had a debate with the British Association for the Advancement of Science and the bishop strongly disagreed with the thought of human beings coming from monkeys. The credit went to the science as Joseph Hooker argued that it would be better to come from apes rather than from men who abuse their skills and talents (Hesketh 2009, p. 5). Despite of the differences, Darwin still gained the support of Lyell, Huxley and the others. Both Lyell and Gray connected the evolution with theology while Huxley firmly believed that the two concepts are incompatible. The education set forth by the Church was bombarded by Huxley with criticisms as that kind of educational model built for aristocrats and the approach was not appropriate enough to produce the next set of expert scientists. Owen then claimed that the brain structure of apes and human beings are different which set them apart biologically, but it was discredited by Huxley. Later on, a movement called Darwinism surfaced to make progress regarding the awareness of people on evolution. Lyell then created his work as Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man, but that work did not satisfy Darwin (Hesketh 2009, p. 90). Other works to come out in support of the evolution were the body structure of humans to be related to apes by Huxley and the evidences presented by Henry Bates regarding the natural selection. That gave Darwin the credit and the award of Copley Medal given by the Royal Society. On the same day of the awarding, the first assembly of the so-called X Club occurred under the leadership of Huxley and that group was known to pursue science without the intervention of any forms of religion (Windchy 2009, p. 91). Those led to more scientists believing in evolution, but natural selection was not yet widely accepted. The book that made Darwin and his evolution theory popular entitled The Origin of Species became a world-known book that led to several adaptations by various authors. That particular book gained massive attention of the public as evolution was promoted. With that, Darwin became a prominent figure even in the popular culture as he was depicted to have an ape body in various caricatures to pertain to evolution as his very own idea. Darwin then caused some biologists to think about how accurate the objectivity of the concept of evolution is (Windchy 2009, p. 238). They think about the possibility of having the species objectively in the real world which means the possibility of the existence of species apart from the judgment of the observer. Later on the evolution set forth by Darwin was combined with the inheritance concept deduced by Mendel to give rise to the modern concept of evolution. That modern concept greatly influenced the way biologists view the species as Ernst Mayer and Theodosius Dobzhansky created the foundation for that modern synthesis. Dobzhansky then pointed out the divergence of species due to genetic processes (Larche 2008, p. 49). Also the reproductive isolation combined with the genetic process gave rise to the emergence of new species. Ernst Mayr then published his book in 1942 regarding the problems on the concept of species. He pointed out that scientists have various concepts of species depending upon their investigation. He also argued about the biological species concept and that reproduction and isolation must happen for the emergence of new species. He also tackled it on that book regarding the history of the concept of species. Throughout his life, he forwarded the biological species concept to solve the debates regarding the problems of that concept. Theoretically, it solves many challenges especially the geological barriers and reproductive isolation. It was then said to be not very helpful when it comes to discovery of new species. It cannot also cater the cases when different species interbreed and produce viable and fertile offspring (Haffer 2007, p. 201). That may not be the case with animals like tigers and lions interbreeding in captivity producing ligers. Mayr pointed out that it should occur in the wild. Despite of the widening acceptance of evolution, which still posed a problem regarding the concept of species as said in the preceding paragraphs that species in its biological sense is quite limited despite of various recent discoveries and advancements that gave rise to other forms of specific uses for the term species. Since the history had shown how most people started to think that the origin of man is based on the Creation set forth by the Church, the knowledge on the origin was not yet comprehensive enough to make the public understand the unity of the universe. The early naturalists connect the organic to the objects that are visible to the naked eyes. Since they believed that life forms were particular entities, it meant for them that one label must be given to them. That label with the application of technical expression made use of species. It was part of the learning that humans categorized the objects in nature and place some descriptions for those things. They have created inventories to easily organize and distinguish the particular units. That practice resulted to the labeling of parts of nature that can be said to be the reason for species to be related to organic beings. That set forth to the conflict between Creation and Evolution and those two concepts antagonize one another. It was then said that once one of the two is true, the other must be false. Evolution is said to be neutral when considered as a process but impossible to be half true. Once it is considered to be fully true, then the individuals are not considered to be part of organic creation. Those observed phenomena occurred in the long process of elimination and in the changes that happened in the world throughout history. It was then observable in mammals as those are highly specialized organisms that strived to survive. It would be subject to controversy once the concept of species is said to be final and unchanging as it violates the law of nature which is constant change. Despite of that, the easy way of identifying species as the individual organic unit prevails (Bailey 1896, pp. 455-456). To be particular, there are some philosophical dilemmas involving the concept of species. Those are realism, nominalism, pluralism and monism. Each has different views, but they are all involved in the possible redefinition of species. Realism then questioned the true existence of species. In a limited point-of-view, species pertains to the set of organism sharing a pool of characteristics that distinguish them from other organisms. It is also related to nominalism wherein people tend to label things since species is a taxonomic term used to group the organisms of similar kinds (Ridley 2004, p. 374). Those are said to both exist especially the universals and natural kinds or organisms. Some people then thought of making one perspective only that unifies the points-of-view of scientists particularly the biologists regarding the concept of species. That pertains to monism that condensed all ideas and perspectives into one (Jaworski 2011, p. 257). On the other hand, pluralism is the exact opposite wherein several claims and understanding are produced out of the study of species (Stamos 2003, p. 314). With those at hand, truly species is said to be problematic, but in the course of time biologists and other scientists make efforts to solve the limitations and problems being encountered with the established concepts like species. Bibliography Auletta, G. (2011) Cognitive biology: dealing with information from bacteria to minds. USA, Oxford University Press. Bailey, L. (1896) The philosophy of species-making. Botanical Gazette [Internet]. December, 22 (6), pp. 454-462. Available from: < http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/2464806.pdf?acceptTC=true> [Accessed 22 March 2012]. Claridge, M. (2010) Species are real biological entities. In: Ayala, F. and Arp, R. Contemporary debates in philosophy of biology. USA, Blackwell Publishing, pp. 91-98. Ghiselin, M. (1974) A radical solution to the species problem. Systematic Zoology [Internet]. December, 23 (4), pp. pp. 36-544. Available from: < http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2412471?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=55907936593> [Accessed 21 March 2012]. Giacobini, G. (1989) Hominidae: proceedings of the 2nd international congress of human paleontology. Milan: Jaca Books. Gutting, G. (2005) Continental philosophy of science. USA, Blackwell Publishing. Haffer, J. (2008) Ornithology, evolution, and philosophy: the life and science of Ernst Mayr 1904-2005. USA, Springer. Hesketh, I. (2009) Of apes and ancestors: evolution, Christianity, and the Oxford debate. Canada, University of Toronto Press. Howard, D. and Berlocher, S. (1998) Endless forms: species and speciation. USA, Oxford University Press. Hull, D. (1978) A matter of individuality. Philosophy of Science [Internet], September, 45 (3), pp. 335-360. Available from: < http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/187022?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=55907936593> [Accessed 22 March 2012]. Jaworski, W. (2011) Philosophy of mind: a comprehensive introduction. USA, Blackwell Publishing. Jurmain, R., Kilgore, L. and Trevathan, W. (2009) Essentials of physical anthropology, volume 978, issues 0-3251. USA, Cengage Learning. Larche, R. (2008) Global terrorism issues and developments. USA, Nova Science Publishers. Lindsey, D. (2005) The beast in sheep’s clothing: exposing the lies of Godless human science. Canada, Pelican Publishing Company. Parry, W. and Hacker, E. (1991) Aristotelian logic. USA, University of New York. Raup, D. (1966) Geometric Analysis of Shell Coiling: General Problems. Journal of Paleontology [Internet], September, 40 (5), pp. 1178-1190. Available from: < http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1301992?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=55907936593> [Accessed 22 March 2012]. Reichenbach, H. (1951) The Rise of scientific philosophy. London, Cambridge University Press. Ridley, M. (2004) Evolution. USA, Blackwell Publishing. Stamos, D. (2003) The species problem: biological species, ontology, and the metaphysics of biology. USA, Lexington Books. Stefoff, R. (1998) Charles Darwin and the evolution revolution. USA, Oxford University Press. Wheeler, W. (2012) Systematics: a course of lectures. USA, John Wiley and Sons. Wilkins, J. (2006) Species concepts in modern literature. NCSE [Internet], 26 (4). Available from [Accessed 21 March 2012]. ------. (2006) Species, Kinds, and Evolution. NCSE [Internet], July/August, 26 (4), pp. 36-45. Available from < http://ncse.com/rncse/26/4/species-kinds-evolution> [Accessed 22 March 2012]. Windchy, E. (2009) The end of Darwinism. USA, Xlibris. Read More