Issue |
Med Sci (Paris)
Volume 20, Number 2, Février 2004
|
|
---|---|---|
Page(s) | 248 - 253 | |
Section | Hypothèses/débats | |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/medsci/2004202248 | |
Published online | 15 February 2004 |
La génétique est-elle encore une discipline ?
Genetics: still a discipline ?
Université Paris 1-Panthéon-Sorbonne, Institut d’histoire et de philosophie des sciences et des techniques, 17, rue de la Sorbonne, 75006 Paris, France
Au sens institutionnel du terme «discipline», la génétique est assurément une discipline. Au sens intellectuel du terme, l’on peut se demander si elle l’est encore. Avec l’émergence de la biologie moléculaire, et plus encore à l’occasion de ses développements récents, le concept de gène, concept théorique central de la génétique, est devenu manifestement obscur. Loin de simplifier la définition du gène, sa caractérisation structurale (moléculaire) l’a rendu totalement équivoque, et ce de manière probablement irréversible. Les raisons que les biologistes ont de garder ce terme sont davantage pragmatiques (communication scientifique entre disciplines biologiques) et idéologiques que théoriques.
Abstract
In the institutional sense of the term «discipline» (laboratories, societies, congresses, curricula, etc.), genetics remains a discipline. In the intellectual sense of the term (consensus on a definite array of concepts, methods and theoretical purposes), it is doubtful that genetics is still a discipline. At first, molecular biology seemed to have introduced an unequivocal structural (or molecular) definition of the gene : a definite sequence of nucelotides that code for a protein. In fact, as it appears in retrospect, this was not the case. Even in 1961, when Jacob and Monod proposed their first model of genetic regulation in bacteria, there was no possibility of constructing a non equivocal concept of the gene. More recent developments in molecular genetics have made this situation worse. There is no possible definition of the gene as a general category. The reasons why biologists keep the word are pragmatic rather than theoretical: communication among scientists, economic interests and ideology.
© 2004 médecine/sciences - Inserm / SRMS
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.