Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T20:49:38.419Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic Information as Instructional Content*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Ulrich E. Stegmann
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The concept of genetic information is controversial because it attributes semantic properties to what seem to be ordinary biochemical entities. I argue that nucleic acids contain information in a semantic sense, but only about a limited range of effects. In contrast to other recent proposals, however, I analyze genetic information not in terms of a naturalized account of biological functions, but instead in terms of the way in which molecules determine their products during processes known as template-directed syntheses. I argue that determining an outcome in a certain way is constitutive for being an instruction. On this account, the content of genetic information is identified with the template's properties, which determine the product in the way constitutive for instructions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 72 , Issue 3 , July 2005 , pp. 425 - 443
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.)

Footnotes

‡

I am grateful to Martin Carrier, Ulrich Krohs, Eva Neumann-Held, David Papineau, and Richard Samuels for their comments on different versions of the manuscript, and to Wilfried Meyer-Viol for helping me to think about structure-preservation. I also wish to acknowledge the comments of two referees. Research was supported by the Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina through funds from the German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF-LPD 9901/8-83).

References

Alberts, Bruce, et al. (2002), Molecular Biology of the Cell. New York: Garland Science.Google Scholar
Beurton, Peter, Falk, Raphael, and Rheinberger, Hans-Jörg, eds. (2000), The Concept of the Gene in Development and Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crick, Francis H. (1958), “On Protein Synthesis”, On Protein Synthesis 12:138–167.Google ScholarPubMed
Crick, Francis H. (1970), “Central Dogma of Molecular Biology”, Central Dogma of Molecular Biology 227:561–563.Google ScholarPubMed
Davidson, Eric, et al. (2002), “A Genomic Regulatory Network for Development”, A Genomic Regulatory Network for Development 295:1669–1678.Google ScholarPubMed
de Chadarevian, Soraya (1998), “Of Worms and Programmes: Caenorhabditis elegans and the Study of Development”, Of Worms and Programmes: Caenorhabditis elegans and the Study of Development 29:81–105.Google Scholar
Delbrück, Max (1971), “Aristotle-totle-totle”, in Jacques Monod and E Borek (eds.), Of Microbes and Life. New York: Columbia University Press, 50–55.Google Scholar
Gatlin, Lila L. (1972), Information Theory and the Living System. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, Peter (1999), “Genes and Codes: Lessons from the Philosophy of Mind?”, in Hardcastle, Valerie Gray (ed.), Where Biology Meets Psychology: Philosophical Essays. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 305–331.Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, Peter (2000a), “Information, Arbitrariness, and Selection: Comments on Maynard Smith”, Information, Arbitrariness, and Selection: Comments on Maynard Smith 67:202–207.Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, Peter (2000b), “On the Theoretical Role of ‘Genetic Coding’”, On the Theoretical Role of ‘Genetic Coding’ 67:26–44.Google Scholar
Godfrey-Smith, Peter (2003), “Genes Do Not Encode Information for Phenotypic Traits”, in Christopher Hitchcock (ed.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Science. London: Blackwell, 275–289.Google Scholar
Griffiths, Paul E. (2001), “Genetic Information: A Metaphor in Search of a Theory”, Genetic Information: A Metaphor in Search of a Theory 68:394–412.Google Scholar
Griffiths, Paul E. (2002), “Molecular and Developmental Biology”, in Machamer, Peter and Silberstein, Michael (eds.), The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Science. Oxford: Blackwell, 252–271.Google Scholar
Griffiths, Paul E. (forthcoming), “The Fearless Vampire Conservator: Philip Kitcher, Genetic Determinism, and the Informational Gene”, in Neumann-Held, Eva M. and Rehmann-Sutter, Christoph (eds.), Genes in Development. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Jablonka, Eva (2002), “Information: Its Interpretation, Its Inheritance, and Its Sharing”, Information: Its Interpretation, Its Inheritance, and Its Sharing 69:578–605.Google Scholar
Jacob, François ([1970] 1974), The Logic of Living Systems—a History of Heredity. Reprint. Translated by B. E. Spillmann. Originally published as La logique du vivant; une histoire de l’hérédité (Paris: Éditions Gallimard). London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Judson, H. F. (1993), “Frederick Sanger, Erwin Chargaff, and the Metamorphosis of Specificity”, Frederick Sanger, Erwin Chargaff, and the Metamorphosis of Specificity 135:19–23.Google Scholar
Kauffman, Stuart A. (1993), The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kay, Lily E. (2000), Who Wrote the Book of Life? A History of the Genetic Code. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Keller, Evelyn F. (2000), “Decoding the Genetic Program”, in Beurton, Peter, Falk, Raphael, and Rheinberger, Hans-Jörg (eds.), The Concept of the Gene in Development and Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 159–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keyes, Martha E. (1999), “The Prion Challenge to the ‘Central Dogma’ of Molecular Biology, 1965–1991. Part I: Prelude to Prions”, The Prion Challenge to the ‘Central Dogma’ of Molecular Biology, 1965–1991. Part I: Prelude to Prions 30:1–19.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Philip S. (2001), “Battling the Undead: How (and How Not) to Resist Genetic Determinism”, in Singh, Rama S. et al. (eds.), Thinking about Evolution: Historical, Philosophical, and Political Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 396–414.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, John (2000), “The Concept of Information in Biology”, The Concept of Information in Biology 67:177–194.Google Scholar
Moss, Lenny (2003), What Genes Can’t Do. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, David, and Cox, Michael (2000), Lehninger Principles of Biochemistry. New York: Viking.Google Scholar
Neumann-Held, Eva (2001), “Let’s Talk about Genes: The Process Molecular Gene Concept and Its Context”, in Oyama, Susan, Griffiths, Paul E., and Gray, Russell D. (eds.), Cycles of Contingency: Developmental Systems and Evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 69–84.Google Scholar
Neumann-Held, Eva (forthcoming), “Genes—Causes—Codes: Deciphering DNA’s Ontological Privilege”, in Neumann-Held, Eva and Rehmann-Sutter, Christoph (eds.), Genes in Development. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Noble, Dennis (2002), “Modeling the Heart—from Genes to Cells to the Whole Organ”, Modeling the Heart—from Genes to Cells to the Whole Organ 295:1678–1682.Google Scholar
Polanyi, Michael (1968), “Life’s Irreducible Structure”, Life’s Irreducible Structure 160:1308–1312.Google ScholarPubMed
Pontecorvo, Guido (1958), “Self-Reproduction and All That”, Self-Reproduction and All That 12:1–5.Google Scholar
Sarkar, Sahotra (1996), “Biological Information: A Skeptical Look at Some Central Dogmas of Molecular Biology”, in Sarkar, Sahotra (ed.), The Philosophy and History of Molecular Biology: New Perspectives. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 187–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarkar, Sahotra (2003), “Genes Encode Information for Phenotypic Traits”, in Hitchcock, Christopher (ed.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Science. London: Blackwell, 259–274.Google Scholar
Schrödinger, Erwin (1944), What Is Life? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stent, Gunther S. (1981), “Strength and Weakness of the Genetic Approach to the Development of the Nervous System”, Strength and Weakness of the Genetic Approach to the Development of the Nervous System 4:163–194.Google Scholar
Sterelny, Kim, and Griffiths, Paul E. (1999), Sex and Death: An Introduction to Philosophy of Biology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sterelny, Kim, Smith, Kelly, and Dickison, Michael (1996), “The Extended Replicator”, The Extended Replicator 11:377–403.Google Scholar
Stotz, Karola, and Griffiths, Paul E. (forthcoming), “How Biologists Conceptualize Genes: An Empirical Study”, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences.Google Scholar
Temin, H. M., and Mizutani, S. (1970), “RNA-Dependent DNA Polymerase in Virions of Rous Sarcoma Virus”, RNA-Dependent DNA Polymerase in Virions of Rous Sarcoma Virus 226:1211–1213.Google ScholarPubMed
Thieffry, Denis, and Sarkar, Sahotra (1998), “Forty Years under the Central Dogma”, Forty Years under the Central Dogma 23:312–316.Google ScholarPubMed
Watson, James D. (1965), Molecular Biology of the Gene. New York: W. A. Benjamin.Google Scholar
Weber, Marcel (2005), Philosophy of Experimental Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wheeler, Michael (2003), “Do Genes Code for Traits?”, in Rojszczak, A., Cachro, J. and Kurczewski, G. (eds.), Philosophical Dimensions of Logic and Science: Selected Contributed Papers from the 11th International Congress of Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 151–64.Google Scholar
Wolpert, Lewis, et al. (2002), Principles of Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yockey, Hubert P. (1992), Information Theory and Molecular Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar