Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-k8lnt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T12:07:39.564Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Functional Stability and Systems Level Causation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Anders Strand  and
Gry Oftedal
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A wide range of gene knockout experiments shows that functional stability is an important feature of biological systems. On this backdrop, we present an argument for higher-level causation based on counterfactual dependence. Furthermore, we sketch a metaphysical picture providing resources to explain the metaphysical nature of functional stability, higher-level causation, and the relevant notion of levels. Our account aims to clarify the role empirical results and philosophical assumptions should play in debates about reductionism and higher-level causation. It thereby contributes to the development of a philosophical foundation for systems biology.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 76 , Issue 5 , December 2009 , pp. 809 - 820
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

‡

Thanks to Henrik Forssell, Nils Roll-Hansen, and the participants at the biennial PSA meeting in Pittsburgh 2008 and the Seminar in Science Studies in Oslo, January 2009.

References

Alberghina, L., and Westerhoff, H. V., eds. (2005), Systems Biology: Definitions and Perspectives. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albert, R., Jeong, H., and Barabasi, A.-L. (2000), “Error and Attack Tolerance of Complex Networks”, Error and Attack Tolerance of Complex Networks 406:378–382.Google ScholarPubMed
Bickle, John (2003), Philosophy and Neuroscience: A Ruthlessly Reductive Account. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boogerd, Fred C., Bruggeman, Frank J., Hofmeyr, Jan-Hendrik S., and Westerhoff, Hans V. (2007), “Towards Philosophical Foundations of Systems Biology: Introduction”, in Boogerd, Fred C., Bruggeman, Frank J., Hofmeyr, Jan-Hendrik S., and Westerhoff, Hans V. (eds.), Systems Biology: Philosophical Foundation. Amsterdam and Oxford: Elsevier, 1–19.Google Scholar
Chisaka, O., and Capecchi, M. R. (1991), “Regionally Restricted Developmental Defects Resulting from Targeted Disruption of the Mouse Homeobox Gene hox-1.5”, Regionally Restricted Developmental Defects Resulting from Targeted Disruption of the Mouse Homeobox Gene hox-1.5 350:473–479.Google ScholarPubMed
Chisaka, O., Musci, T. S., and Capecchi, M. R. (1992), “Developmental Defects of the Ear, Cranial Nerves and Hindbrain Resulting from Targeted Disruption of the Mouse Homeobox Gene hox-1.6”, Developmental Defects of the Ear, Cranial Nerves and Hindbrain Resulting from Targeted Disruption of the Mouse Homeobox Gene hox-1.6 355:516–520.Google ScholarPubMed
Collins, John, Hall, Ned, and Paul, L. A., eds. (2004), Causation and Counterfactuals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craver, Carl (2007), Explaining the Brain: Mechanisms and the Mosaic Unity of Neuroscience. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, B. S., Bonkowski, M., Roy, J., and Ritz, K. (2001), “Functional Stability, Substrate Utilisation and Biological Indicators of Soils Following Environmental Impacts”, Functional Stability, Substrate Utilisation and Biological Indicators of Soils Following Environmental Impacts 16:49–61.Google Scholar
Kauffman, S. A. (1967), “Metabolic Stability and Epigenesis in Randomly Constructed Genetic Nets”, Metabolic Stability and Epigenesis in Randomly Constructed Genetic Nets 22:437–467.Google Scholar
Kim, Jaegwon (1998), Mind in a Physical World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitano, H. (2004), “Biological Robustness”, Biological Robustness 5:826–837.Google ScholarPubMed
LeMouellic, H., Lallemand, Y., and Brulet, P. (1992), “Homeosis in the Mouse Induced by a Null-Mutation in the hox-3.1 Gene”, Homeosis in the Mouse Induced by a Null-Mutation in the hox-3.1 Gene 69:251–264.Google Scholar
Lewis, David (1986), “Causation”, in Philosophical Papers. Vol. 2. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 159–213.Google Scholar
Li, E., Sucov, H. M., Lee, K. F., Evans, R. M., and Jaenisch, R. (1993), “Normal Development and Growth of Mice Carrying a Targeted Disruption of the α-1 Retinoic Acid Receptor Gene”, Normal Development and Growth of Mice Carrying a Targeted Disruption of the α-1 Retinoic Acid Receptor Gene 90:1590–1594.Google ScholarPubMed
Nagel, Ernest ([1961] 1979), The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. Indianapolis and Cambridge: Hackett.Google Scholar
Oppenheim, Paul, and Putnam, Hilary (1958), “The Unity of Science as a Working Hypothesis”, in Herbert Feigl, Grover Maxwell, and Michael Scriven (eds.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 3, Concepts, Theories, and the Mind-Body Problem. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 3–36.Google Scholar
Sampogna, R. V., and Nigam, S. K. (2004), “Implications of Gene Networks for Understanding Resilience and Vulnerability in the Kidney Branching”, Implications of Gene Networks for Understanding Resilience and Vulnerability in the Kidney Branching 19:339–347.Google ScholarPubMed
Schaffer, Jonathan (2003), “Is There a Fundamental Level?”, Is There a Fundamental Level? 37:498–517.Google Scholar
Schuendeln, M. M., Piekorz, R. P., Wichmann, C., Lee, Y., McKinnon, P. J., Boyd, K., Takahashi, Y., and Ihle, J. N. (2004), “The Centrosomal, Putative Tumor Suppression Protein TACC2 Is Dispensable for Normal Development, and Deficiency Does Not Lead to Cancer”, The Centrosomal, Putative Tumor Suppression Protein TACC2 Is Dispensable for Normal Development, and Deficiency Does Not Lead to Cancer 24:6403–6409.Google Scholar
Shastry, B. S. (1994), “More to Learn from Gene Knockouts”, More to Learn from Gene Knockouts 136:171–182.Google ScholarPubMed
Simons, Peter (1987), Parts: A Study in Ontology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, V., Chou, K. N., Lashkari, D., Botstein, D., and Brown, P. O. (1996), “Functional Analysis of the Genes of Yeast Chromosome V by Genetic Footprinting”, Functional Analysis of the Genes of Yeast Chromosome V by Genetic Footprinting 274:2069–2074.Google ScholarPubMed
Varzi, Achille (2006), “Mereology”, in Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Winter 2006 ed. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2006/entries/mereology/.Google Scholar
Wagner, Andreas (2000), “Robustness against Genetic Mutations in Genetic Networks of Yeast”, Robustness against Genetic Mutations in Genetic Networks of Yeast 24:355–361.Google ScholarPubMed
Wagner, Andreas (2005), “Distributed Robustness versus Redundancy as Causes of Mutational Robustness”, Distributed Robustness versus Redundancy as Causes of Mutational Robustness 27:176–188.Google ScholarPubMed
Yablo, Stephen (1992), “Mental Causation”, Mental Causation 101:245–280.Google Scholar