The Social Contexts of Research. Edited by Saad Z. Nagi and Ronald G. Corwin. Pp. xii + 409. (John Wiley: New York and London, August 1972.) £5.65.

Sociology of Science

In this essay, I explore several facets of research through design in order to contribute to discussions about how the approach should develop. The essay has three parts. In the first, I review two influential theories from the Philosophy of Science to help reflect on the nature of design theory, concluding that research through design is likely to produce theories that are provisional, contingent, and aspirational. In the second part, I discuss three possible interpretations for the diversity of approaches to research through design, and suggest that this variation need not be seen as a sign of inadequate standards or a lack of cumulative progress in the field, but may be natural for a generative endeavour. In the final section, I suggest that, rather than aiming to develop increasingly comprehensive theories of design, practice based research might better view theory as annotation of realised design examples, and particularly portfolios of related pieces. Overall, I suggest that the design research community should be wary of impulses towards convergence and standardisation, and instead take pride in its aptitude for exploring and speculating, particularising and diversifying, and - especially - its ability to manifest the results in the form of new, conceptually rich artefacts.

/pdf/what-should-we-expect-from-research-through-design-14fa8sfcq2.pdf

What should we expect from research through design

In the six decades since the publication of Julian Huxley's Evolution: The Modern Synthesis, the spectacular empirical advances in the biological sciences have been accompanied by equally significant developments within the core theoretical framework of the discipline. As a result, evolutionary theory today includes concepts and even entire new fields that were not part of the foundational structure of the Modern Synthesis. In this volume, sixteen leading evolutionary biologists and philosophers of science survey the conceptual changes that have emerged since Huxley's landmark publication, not only in such traditional domains of evolutionary biology as quantitative genetics and paleontology but also in such new fields of research as genomics and EvoDevo. Most of the contributors to Evolution, the Extended Synthesis accept many of the tenets of the classical framework but want to relax some of its assumptions and introduce significant conceptual augmentations of the basic Modern Synthesis structure -- just as the architects of the Modern Synthesis themselves expanded and modulated previous versions of Darwinism. This continuing revision of a theoretical edifice the foundations of which were laid in the middle of the nineteenth century--the reexamination of old ideas, proposals of new ones, and the synthesis of the most suitable -- shows us how science works, and how scientists have painstakingly built a solid set of explanations for what Darwin called the "grandeur" of life. Contributors: John Beatty, Werner Callebaut, Jeremy Draghi, Chrisantha Fernando, Sergey Gavrilets, John C. Gerhart, Eva Jablonka, David Jablonski, Marc W. Kirschner, Marion J. Lamb, Alan C. Love, Gerd B. Muller, Stuart A. Newman, John Odling-Smee, Massimo Pigliucci, Michael Purugganan, Eors Szathmary, Gunter P. Wagner, David Sloan Wilson, Gregory A. Wray.

Evolution, the Extended Synthesis

With increasing demand to support and accelerate progress in breeding for novel traits, the plant research community faces the need to accurately measure increasingly large numbers of plants and plant parameters. The goal is to provide quantitative analyses of plant structure and function relevant for traits that help plants better adapt to low-input agriculture and resource-limited environments. We provide an overview of the inherently multidisciplinary research in plant phenotyping, focusing on traits that will assist in selecting genotypes with increased resource use efficiency. We highlight opportunities and challenges for integrating noninvasive or minimally invasive technologies into screening protocols to characterize plant responses to environmental challenges for both controlled and field experimentation. Although technology evolves rapidly, parallel efforts are still required because large-scale phenotyping demands accurate reporting of at least a minimum set of information concerning experiment...

https://horticulture.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2013/09/Fiorani-and-Schurr-2013-Future-Scenarios-of-Plant-Phenotyping2.pdf

Future scenarios for plant phenotyping.

Preface 1. Biology and its philosophy 2. Autonomy and provincialism 3. Teleology and the roots of autonomy 4. Reductionism and the temptation of provincialism 5. The structure of evolutionary theory 6. Fitness 7. Species 8. New problems of functionalism Bibliography Index.

The Structure of Biological Science.

I Philosophical Fundamentals.- 1 Ontological Fundamentals.- 2 Semantical and Logical Fundamentals.- 3 Epistemological Fundamentals.- II Fundamental Issues in Biophilosophy.- 4 Life.- 5 Ecology.- 6 Psychobiology.- 7 Systematics.- 8 Developmental Biology.- 9 Evolutionary Theory.- 10 Teleology.- 11 Concluding Remarks.- References.- Name Index.

Foundations of biophilosophy

What exactly are genomes, genotypes and phenotypes? And what about phenomes?

This paper tackles a highly controversial issue: the problem of the compatibility of science and religion, and its bearing on science and religious education respectively. We challenge the popular view that science and religion are compatible or even complementary. In order to do so, we give a brief characterization of our conceptions of science and religion. Conspicuous differences at the doctrinal, metaphysical, methodological and attitudinal level are noted. Regarding these aspects, closer examination reveals that science and religion are not only different but in fact incompatible. Some consequences of our analysis for education as well as for education policy are explored. We submit that a religious education, particularly at an early age, is an obstacle to the development of a scientific mentality. For this and other reasons, religious education should be kept away from public schools and universities. Instead of promoting a religious world view, we should teach our children what science knows about religion, i.e., how science explains the existence of religion in historical, biological, psychological and sociological terms.

Is religious education compatible with science education

In this paper we examine the following problems: How many concepts of function are there in biology, social science, and technology? Are they logically related and if so, how? Which of these function concepts effect a functional explanation as opposed to a mere functional account? What are the consequences of a pluralist view of functions for functionalism? We submit that there are five concepts of function in biology, which are logically related in a particular way, and six function concepts in social science and technology. Only two of them may help effect a genuine functional explanation. Finally, our synthetic approach allows us to distinguish four different varieties of functionalism in biology, psychology, social science, and technology: formalist, black boxist, adaptationist, and teleological. And only one of them is explanatory in the strong sense defended here.

Martin Mahner

Papers

Foundations of biophilosophy

What exactly are genomes, genotypes and phenotypes? And what about phenomes?

Is religious education compatible with science education

Function and Functionalism: A Synthetic Perspective

Systema Cryptoceratorum Phylogeneticum - (Insecta, Heteroptera)