Scielo RSS <![CDATA[Scientiae Studia]]> http://www.scielo.br/rss.php?pid=1678-316620140001&lang=es vol. 12 num. 1 lang. es <![CDATA[SciELO Logo]]> http://www.scielo.br/img/en/fbpelogp.gif http://www.scielo.br <![CDATA[<b>Editorial</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-31662014000100001&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es <![CDATA[<b>La intervención kantiana en el debate de las razas de finales del siglo XVIII</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-31662014000100002&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es El presente trabajo reconstruye algunos de los momentos principales del debate acerca del concepto de "raza humana" que tuvo lugar hacia finales del siglo xviii entre Kant, Forster y Herder. El objetivo de esta reconstrucción es mostrar, en una primera instancia, que esa polémica se hallaba determinada por la necesidad de adaptar las herramientas histórico-naturales heredadas a la emergencia de una concepción irreversible de la variable temporal. En un segundo momento, es analizada la posición asumida por Kant frente a los problemas epistémicos que generaba la progresiva temporización de los fenómenos naturales. Según se demuestra a partir del presente análisis, la introducción de principios regulativos y el giro kantiano hacia el ámbito de la subjetividad se hallaban orientados a respaldar la vigencia de la comprensión clásica de las formas orgánicas naturales, de modo a garantizar el carácter sistemático del orden natural en un contexto en el cual las transformaciones histórico-naturales ya no resultaban concebibles bajo el modelo clásico de la reversibilidad temporal.<hr/>This work reconstructs some key moments of the debate on the concept of "human race" that took place in the late eighteenth century among Kant, Forster and Herder. It aims to show, first, that this controversy was defined by the need to adapt the natural-historical tools inherited from the emergence of a conception of irreversible temporality. Secondly, it analyses Kant´s position regarding the epistemic problems generated by the progressive temporization of natural phenomena. Based on this analysis, it is shown that the introduction of regulative principles and the Kantian turn toward subjectivity tended to support the validity of the classic understanding of natural-organic forms, and thus, to guarantee the systematic character of natural order in a context in which historical and natural transformations could no longer be conceived under the classic model of temporal reversibility. <![CDATA[<b>Herbert Spencer</b>: <b>entre Darwin y Cuvier</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-31662014000100003&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es En sus Principios de biología de 1864, Spencer esboza una complementación entre el cuvierianismo transformacional mitigado que daba sentido a la idea de equilibración directa ahí presentada, y la teoría de la selección natural que Darwin ya había formulado en 1859. Era a este último mecanismo que Spencer denominaba "equilibración indirecta". Según Spencer, esta segunda forma de equilibración permitía explicar fenómenos evolutivos que la primera, la equilibración directa, no podía causar; aunque para él también era evidente que el accionar de esa segunda equilibración debía siempre subordinarse al control de la primera.<hr/>In his Principles of Biology, published in 1864, Spencer outlines a complementarity between the mitigated transformational cuvierianism that was in the basis of his idea of direct equilibration, and the theory of the natural selection that Darwin had already formulated in 1859. Spencer called the mechanism of natural selection indirect equilibration. According to him, this second form of equilibration enabled the explanation of some evolutionary phenomena that could not be caused by direct equilibration. However, for Spencer, it was clear that the operation of this second equilibration had to be always subordinated to the control of the first one. <![CDATA[<b>Freud's <i>Trieb</i> as instinct 1</b>: <b>sexuality and reproduction</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-31662014000100004&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es O conceito freudiano de "impulso", ou "instinto" (Trieb), é reconhecidamente um dos conceitos mais fundamentais da psicanálise. No entanto, seu sentido ainda é objeto de controvérsia. Originalmente definido por Freud em um sentido biológico ou quase biológico, sua recepção em muitas das diversas tradições pós-freudianas tendeu, frequentemente, a recusar essa filiação epistemológica inicial. Um dos sinais dessa reorientação doutrinária é a recusa da tradução de "Trieb" por "instinto" e a preferência pelo neologismo "pulsão", de origem francesa e comum na literatura psicanalítica escrita em várias das línguas neolatinas, inclusive em português. O objetivo deste artigo é criticar essa tendência. Para tanto, são examinados os principais argumentos normalmente apresentados contra uma visão biológica do Trieb freudiano, a saber, 1) a alternativa terminológica entre os termos alemães "Trieb" e "Instinkt" e o modo como estes são utilizados por Freud; 2) a crítica freudiana de uma redução da sexualidade humana à função reprodutiva; 3) o conceito de "Todestrieb" ("instinto de morte" ou "pulsão de morte") formulado por Freud por volta de 1920 e central na etapa final de seu pensamento. Procura-se argumentar que essas formulações não impedem uma interpretação biológica do conceito de "Trieb". Essa interpretação, por sua vez, abre uma via de diálogo entre a psicanálise e a biologia, a qual é também enfática e explicitamente defendida por Freud. Esta primeira parte do trabalho introduz a questão e também aborda o problema da relação entre sexualidade e reprodução na psicanálise e na biologia. Uma segunda parte, a ser publicada em uma próxima edição de Scientiae Studia, será dedicada ao problema da agressividade e da autodestrutividade nessas duas áreas do conhecimento.<hr/>Freud's concept of "drive" or "instinct" ("Trieb") has been widely acknowledged as one of the most fundamental concepts of psychoanalysis. However, its meaning is still a matter of controversy. It was originally defined by Freud in a biological or quasi-biological sense, but its reception in many different post-Freudian traditions has often tended to reject this early epistemological affiliation. One sign of this theoretical reorientation has been to refuse the translation of "Trieb" as "instinct" and to favor instead the neologism "pulsion" ("drive"), which has French origins and became common in the psychoanalytic literature written in many neo-Latin languages, including Portuguese. The objective of this paper is to criticize this trend. For that, the main arguments usually presented against a biological view of Freud's "Trieb" are discussed, namely: (1) the terminological alternative between the German words "Trieb" and "Instinkt" and how these terms are employed by Freud; (2) Freud's critique of the reduction of human sexuality to the reproductive function; (3) the concept of "Todestrieb" ("death instinct" or "death drive"), formulated by Freud around 1920 and central in the last stage of his thought. It is argued that these formulations do not preclude a biological interpretation of the concept of "Trieb". Such interpretation, in turn, opens the way for dialogue between psychoanalysis and biology, a dialogue which was also emphatically and explicitly supported by Freud. This first part of the paper is an introduction to this issue, and approaches the problem of the relationship between sexuality and reproduction in psychoanalysis and biology. A second part will be published in a forthcoming issue of Scientiae Studia; it will be dedicated to the problem of aggression and self-destructiveness in these two fields of knowledge. <![CDATA[<b>The many faces of altruism</b>: <b>selective pressures and human groups</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-31662014000100005&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es No âmbito do debate sobre as unidades envolvidas nos processos seletivos, a controvérsia sobre a possibilidade de comportamentos genuinamente altruístas tem um lugar destacado. Partindo de uma posição declaradamente pluralista, discutir-se-ão, neste artigo, algumas questões relevantes para esse tópico. Em primeiro lugar, o altruísmo será concebido como uma propriedade fenotípica dos grupos biológicos, e não apenas de seus membros. Essa caraterização levará, em um segundo momento, à discussão sobre a relação entre grupos em sociedades complexas, como é o caso das sociedades humanas. Nesse contexto, será esboçado um modelo sobre como os comportamentos altruístas e os comportamentos egoístas se solapam em níveis diferentes das dinâmicas sociais. Finalmente, será sugerido um método de análise dirigido a determinar quais forças evolutivas entram em jogo, e sobre que tipo de comportamento, em casos empíricos concretos.<hr/>In the debate on the units of selection, the controversy about the possibility of genuinely altruistic behavior has a prominent place. By assuming a pluralistic position, some relevant issues on the topic will be discussed in this paper. Firstly, altruism will be conceived as a phenotypic property of biological groups, not just of their members. Secondly, this characterization will be applied to the discussion on the relationship between groups in complex societies, as humans ones. In that context, a model about how altruistic and egoistic behaviors overlap at different levels of social dynamics will be outlined. Finally, a method aimed at determining what kinds of evolutionary forces influence behavior in empirical cases will be suggested. <![CDATA[<b>Proliferación subdisciplinar en biología, debacle del reduccionismo y nuevas estrategias de unificación</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-31662014000100006&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es Durante las últimas décadas, la biología ha sido objeto de una considerable proliferación teórica y subdisciplinar, hecho que suscita la pregunta acerca de su unidad. Por ello, a partir del abandono del reduccionismo como estrategia unificadora, el interrogante filosófico es qué otras formas alternativas de relaciones subdisciplinares son posibles, y si dichas relaciones logran dar unidad a la biología. En el presente artículo, a partir de una breve consideración de algunos de los problemas que el programa reduccionista ha tenido en biología, analizaremos diferentes tipos de relaciones que se encuentran entre las subdisciplinas de la biología contemporánea. En particular, indagaremos cuatro de las principales propuestas que pueden encontrarse en la literatura filosófica especializada; ofrecemos entonces dos nuevas propuestas de relación interdisciplinar: el isomorfismo de la biología evolutiva, e la importación/exportación de cuerpos teóricos, propia de la relación entre la ecología y la fisiología. Finalmente, presentaremos algunas consideraciones en torno al objetivo de la unidad de la ciencia en general, como también acerca de la clase de cohesión que creemos posible para la biología a partir de nuestros análisis, defendiendo la idea de un pluralismo de las relaciones interdisciplinares y de la unidad como un fenómeno local.<hr/>Over the last decades, in biology there has been a proliferation of subdisciplines and theories, and this poses a question about its unity. Consequently, after reductionism was abandoned as a unifying strategy, philosophical questions have been raised about the possibility of alternative forms of relations among the subdisciplines, and whether they can effectively accomplish a unity of biology. This article starts with a brief consideration of some of the problems that the reductionist program confronts in biology, and then analyzes different kind of relations that are present among the subdisciplines of contemporary biology. In particular, we investigate four of the main proposals that can be found in the specialized philosophical literature; and then we propose two models of inter-disciplinary relations: isomorphism in evolutionary biology, and import/export of theoretical corpus, present in the relation between ecology and physiology. Finally, we offer a few ideas on unity as a goal for science in general, and also about the kind of cohesion that we think to be possible for biology based on our analysis. Thus, we defend the idea of pluralism of inter-disciplinary relations and of unity as a local phenomenon. <![CDATA[<b>Warren Weaver y el Programa de Biología Experimental de la Fundación Rockefeller</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-31662014000100007&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es El objetivo de este trabajo es poner al descubierto los principales valores cognitivos y epistemológicos desde los que Warren Weaver puso en marcha el Programa de Biología Experimental, un programa que llevado a cabo desde la presidencia de la división de ciencias naturales de la Fundación Rockefeller, marcó y condicionó en buena medida el posterior desarrollo de la investigación biológica. Para tal fin se mostrará, en primer lugar, cómo fue la llegada de Weaver a la Fundación Rockefeller, así como las razones bajo las cuáles el consejo de esa institución decidió entre 1932 y 1933 dar prioridad a las investigaciones biomédicas, y la manera por la cual lo hicieron. En un segundo momento, el más extenso e importante, veremos algunos de los elementos más significativos de la perspectiva epistemológica y cognoscitiva de de Weaver. Finalizaremos viendo cómo esa perspectiva, desarrollada en conexión con el Programa de Biología Experimental, inter-actuó con la visión reduccionista de la biología a la que el programa parecía apuntar.<hr/>The aim of this article is to uncover the main cognitive and epistemological values that influenced Warren Weaver in starting the Experimental Biology Program, a program carried out from the time that he became president of the Natural Sciences Division of the Rockefeller Foundation, and which significantly marked and conditioned the subsequent development of biological research. To this end, we first describe the arrival of Warren Weaver at the Rockefeller Foundation, and the reasons for which the Board of this Foundation, between 1932 and 1933, decided to prioritize biomedical research, and the manner in which they did so. Then, secondly, in the largest and most important part of the article, we will present some of the most significant elements of Weaver's epistemological and cognitive perspective. Finally, we will show how this perspective, developed in connection with the Experimental Biology Program, interacted with the reductionist view of biology to which the program seemed to point. <![CDATA[<b>When not being pluralist is good</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-31662014000100008&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es El objetivo de este trabajo es poner al descubierto los principales valores cognitivos y epistemológicos desde los que Warren Weaver puso en marcha el Programa de Biología Experimental, un programa que llevado a cabo desde la presidencia de la división de ciencias naturales de la Fundación Rockefeller, marcó y condicionó en buena medida el posterior desarrollo de la investigación biológica. Para tal fin se mostrará, en primer lugar, cómo fue la llegada de Weaver a la Fundación Rockefeller, así como las razones bajo las cuáles el consejo de esa institución decidió entre 1932 y 1933 dar prioridad a las investigaciones biomédicas, y la manera por la cual lo hicieron. En un segundo momento, el más extenso e importante, veremos algunos de los elementos más significativos de la perspectiva epistemológica y cognoscitiva de de Weaver. Finalizaremos viendo cómo esa perspectiva, desarrollada en conexión con el Programa de Biología Experimental, inter-actuó con la visión reduccionista de la biología a la que el programa parecía apuntar.<hr/>The aim of this article is to uncover the main cognitive and epistemological values that influenced Warren Weaver in starting the Experimental Biology Program, a program carried out from the time that he became president of the Natural Sciences Division of the Rockefeller Foundation, and which significantly marked and conditioned the subsequent development of biological research. To this end, we first describe the arrival of Warren Weaver at the Rockefeller Foundation, and the reasons for which the Board of this Foundation, between 1932 and 1933, decided to prioritize biomedical research, and the manner in which they did so. Then, secondly, in the largest and most important part of the article, we will present some of the most significant elements of Weaver's epistemological and cognitive perspective. Finally, we will show how this perspective, developed in connection with the Experimental Biology Program, interacted with the reductionist view of biology to which the program seemed to point. <![CDATA[<b>Scientific controversies or denial of science?</b> <b>Agnotology and climate science</b>]]> http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-31662014000100009&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es El objetivo de este trabajo es poner al descubierto los principales valores cognitivos y epistemológicos desde los que Warren Weaver puso en marcha el Programa de Biología Experimental, un programa que llevado a cabo desde la presidencia de la división de ciencias naturales de la Fundación Rockefeller, marcó y condicionó en buena medida el posterior desarrollo de la investigación biológica. Para tal fin se mostrará, en primer lugar, cómo fue la llegada de Weaver a la Fundación Rockefeller, así como las razones bajo las cuáles el consejo de esa institución decidió entre 1932 y 1933 dar prioridad a las investigaciones biomédicas, y la manera por la cual lo hicieron. En un segundo momento, el más extenso e importante, veremos algunos de los elementos más significativos de la perspectiva epistemológica y cognoscitiva de de Weaver. Finalizaremos viendo cómo esa perspectiva, desarrollada en conexión con el Programa de Biología Experimental, inter-actuó con la visión reduccionista de la biología a la que el programa parecía apuntar.<hr/>The aim of this article is to uncover the main cognitive and epistemological values that influenced Warren Weaver in starting the Experimental Biology Program, a program carried out from the time that he became president of the Natural Sciences Division of the Rockefeller Foundation, and which significantly marked and conditioned the subsequent development of biological research. To this end, we first describe the arrival of Warren Weaver at the Rockefeller Foundation, and the reasons for which the Board of this Foundation, between 1932 and 1933, decided to prioritize biomedical research, and the manner in which they did so. Then, secondly, in the largest and most important part of the article, we will present some of the most significant elements of Weaver's epistemological and cognitive perspective. Finally, we will show how this perspective, developed in connection with the Experimental Biology Program, interacted with the reductionist view of biology to which the program seemed to point.