A hereditariedade e a variação biológica são centrais para a evolução biológica. Apesar das diferentes abordagens sobre esse tema, sempre se mostra recorrente no discurso de cientistas, filósofos, historiadores e sociólogos da ciência a problematização do genecentrismo. Desse modo, uma questão relevante é entender o lugar do genecentrismo no pensamento evolutivo - é preciso perguntar como e por que esse tema tem sido problematizado de uma determinada maneira. Essa dissertação tem como objetivo principal, portanto, procurar as condições históricas que possibilitaram a organização do genecentrismo no pensamento evolutivo. A principal ideia defendida nesse estudo é de que a constituição do genecentrismo, e seu lugar central na teoria evolutiva, foram possibilitados pela emergência da racionalidade genética e pela construção de uma identidade genética intrínseca no início do século XX. A partir de evidências históricas, defendo também que a emergência da racionalidade genética permitiu enunciar muitas proposições novas, formando saberes e produzindo discursos, como a demonstração da seleção natural e uma síntese teórica da evolução biológica. Mas também a partir dela se operou “constrições” no conhecimento evolutivo, como a exclusão da Embriologia e a diminuição da importância de fatores ontogenéticos e ambientais. / Heredity and variation are central focus of evolutionary studies. Despite the different approaches to heredity and evolution, the gene-centered version of evolution is a central theme in the discourse of philosophers, historians and sociologists of science. Thereby, my aim here is to understand the place of gene-centered view in the evolutionary thought and to trace the historical conditions of possibility which set up this discourse. The main idea of this dissertation is that the origin of gene-centered view of evolution was made possible by the emergence of genetic rationality and the creation of ‘genetic identity’ at the turn of the twentieth century. Historical evidence is presented to support that the emergence of genetic rationality allowed new propositions to be made, forming knowledge and producing discourse in the evolutionary theory, as the demonstration of natural selection and a theoretical synthesis. But also from the genetic rationality there are effects of “evolutionary constriction", as the exclusion of Embryology from the Evolutionary Synthesis and the decrease importance of ontogenetic and environmental factors.

Considerando explicações sobre o fenômeno polinização a partir de narrativas biológicas, este estudo foi norteado pela seguinte pergunta: até que ponto alguns termos, aparentemente finalistas, podem ser usados em textos científicos sem que ocorra um prejuízo no entendimento de questões ontogenéticas e filogenéticas? Diante esta questão, os objetivos desta pesquisa foram: i) apresentar uma discussão sobre as explicações funcionais na biologia, especificamente em relação ao fenômeno polinização e ii) contribuir para reflexões epistemológicas no ensino de Biologia. Foram selecionados dois filósofos para definições e análises sobre linguagens funcionais, Larry Wright e Robert Cummins. Para análise dos textos científicos sobre o fenômeno polinização, foi realizado o recorte de dois momentos históricos, um do século XVIII, quando se iniciou os estudos sobre polinização, e outro do século XIX, quando a teoria da evolução estava em discussão. As duas interpretações filosóficas defendem, embora de uma maneira distinta, a existência de uma ideia explanatória do conceito de função para a biologia. A concepção de Larry Wright (1973) sustenta que a função explica por que algo existe e a de Robert Cummins (1975) considera que o poder explicativo da função está na avaliação de sua contribuição para o sistema do qual faz parte, não sendo relevante para sua compreensão a informação sobre sua origem evolutiva. As duas obras científicas primárias selecionadas para análises, de Christian Sprengel (1750-1816) e Charles Darwin (1809-1882), apresentaram alguns termos aparentemente finalistas, ou seja, com conotação de caráter teleológico. A análise dos dados permite dizer que a questão sobre função na biologia é bastante inquietante. Tanto a ciência quanto a filosofia estão em processos de desvelar quais as melhores formas de tratamento de termos finalistas que satisfaçam os problemas de seu uso sem que ocorra um prejuízo no entendimento das questões evolutivas do fenômeno estudado. Este estudo sugere uma redução do uso de termos teleológicos em textos científicos, uma vez que há diferentes visões sobre este conceito, o que pode gerar interpretações incorretas. Além disso, as implicações deste estudo para a Didática da Biologia são apresentadas por meio de inserções filosóficas-epistemológicas em aulas de Biologia com o intuito de permitir o desenvolvimento dos conteúdos biológicos de forma mais reflexiva e contextualizada. / Considering explanations about the phenomenon of pollination from biological narratives, this study was guided by the question: at what extent some terms, supposedly finalists, can be used in scientific texts without losses of ontogenetic and phylogenetic meaning? Therefore, the objectives of this research were: i) to present a discussion around functional explanations in biology, specifically in relation to the phenomenon of pollination; and ii) to contribute to epistemological reflections in Biology education. Two philosophers were selected for definitions and analysis of functional languages, Larry Wright and Robert Cummins. To the analysis of the scientific texts about the phenomenon of pollination, two historical moments were framed, one from the XVIII century, when the studies of pollination started, and another from the XIX century, when the theory of evolution was under discussion. Both philosophical interpretations defend, though in distinct ways, the existence of an explanatory idea of the concept of function to biology. Larry Wrights (1973) conception of function is that it explains why something exists, while Robert Cummins (1975) considers that the explicatory power of the function lies in the evaluation of its contribution to the system it belongs, but the information of its evolution history is not relevant to comprehend the function. Both primary scientific works selected for analysis, from Christian Sprengel (1750-1816) and Charles Darwin (1809-1882), presented some terms apparently finalists, which means, with teleological connotative character. The data analysis allowed saying that the inquiry about function in biology is quite intriguing. Science and philosophy are in process of unveiling the best approaches to finalist terms that would satisfy their usage problems without comprehension losses of the evolutive processes of the studied phenomenon. This study suggests a reduction of the use of teleological terms in scientific texts, since there are different analyses about the concept that may lead to misinterpretation. Moreover, the implications of this study to the Didactics of Biology are presented by means of philosophycal-epistemological inserts in Biology classes in order to enable the development of the biological contents in a more flexible and contextualized way.

<div>Compelled by converging research in the natural sciences suggesting the stratigraphic nature of time, I argue for a temporal approach to the venerable problem of synthesis in evolutionary theory. Geneticist and pioneer of the Modern Synthesis (MS), Theodosius Dobzhansky (1900-1975), constructed one of the most powerful synthesis arguments in the history of evolutionary biology in the classic “Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution” (1973). I argue that nothing in evolution makes sense except in the light of time, such that the problem of evolutionary time plays a powerful role in making sense of the conceptual architecture of the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES). The EES offers a strong alternative to the temporal and causal idealizations operating at the hardened core of the MS. I create the philosophical concept of stratigraphic time to strengthen connections between the four problem agendas or “causal catchalls” structuring the new synthesis: (1) developmental plasticity, (2) developmental bias, (3) inclusive inheritance, and (4) niche construction (Laland 2015 et al.). The dissertation is driven by two critical arguments (Chapters 1-3) concerning the subordination of time to process, and two constructive arguments (Chapters 4 and 5) concerning the nature of evolutionary time, which together attest to the conceptual strength of a temporal approach to the multiplicity of evolutionary problems pursued by the EES, and especially the connections between them. </div><div><br></div><div>Chapter 1, “Embracing the Problematic Structure of the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis,” explicates and evaluates the core assumptions of the EES in contrast with those of the MS, which has served as the dominant conceptual framework for evolutionary science and theory since the early twentieth century. Chapter 2, “Deep Time: The Forgotten Frontier,” critically argues that evolutionary time has been subordinated to evolutionary process, that the problem of evolutionary time must be revived after its eclipse at the origin of evolutionary theory, especially due to Darwin’s unnecessarily strict commitments to gradualism, adaptationism, and to the preeminence of natural selection. Chapter 3, “The Chronometric Subordination of Time to Movement in Philosophy, Science, and Society,” critically argues that the subordination of evolutionary time to process is primed by the chronometrically facilitated subordination of time to movement, what mathematician, physicist, and philosopher of science Henri Poincaré (1854-1912) called an unconscious opportunism in philosophical and scientific thought. The constructive arguments unfolded in Chapter 4, “The Continuous Variation of Evolutionary Contingency,” and Chapter 5, “Stratigraphic Time: The Synthesis of Deep and Developmental Rhythms,” attempt to respect causal thinking while conceptualizing evolutionary processes not according to causal laws but rather according to passive and active temporal syntheses (or modes of repetition), effectively delimiting causal thinking to a provisional conceptualization. Stratigraphic time enables conceptualization of the multiplicity of evolutionary process, driven by a new concept of evolutionary contingency. I argue that the roles of chance and causation in the EES are strengthened by concepts of difference and repetition, akin to the conceptual roles played by arrows and cycles of time in the formation of geological and evolutionary thought. These critical and constructive arguments are guided by Gilles Deleuze’s philosophy of time, which he conceptualizes under the rubric of repetition. The three passive and active temporal syntheses, or modes of repetition, Deleuze creates to think the nature of repetition provide conceptual tools for evolutionary synthesis through stratigraphic time. </div><div><br></div>

Evolutionary novelty, the origin of new characters such as the turtle shell or the flower, is a fundamental problem for an evolutionary view of life. Accordingly, it is a central research topic in contemporary biology involving input from several biological disciplines and explanations at several levels of organization. As such it raises questions relative to scientific collaboration and multi-level explanations. Novelty is also involved in theoretical debates in evolutionary biology. It has been appropriated by evo-devo, a scientific synthesis linking research on evolution and development. Thanks to its focus on development, evo-devo claims to explain the mechanistic origin of novelties as new forms, while the Modern Synthesis can only provide statistical explanation of evolutionary change. The origin of an evolutionary novelty is a historical emergence of a new character involving form and function. I focus on three neglected dimensions of the problem of novelty, the functional-historical approach to the problem, research on novelty in the Modern Synthesis era and novelty in plants. I compare the evo-devo approach to novelty to a functional-historical approach of novelty. I focus on its origin in Darwin and its presence in the Modern Synthesis. The comparison of the two approaches reveals distance between conceptual frameworks and proximity in explanatory practices. This is partly related to unwarranted conceptual opposition. In particular, I list several ways of distinguishing novelty and adaptation, some of which are not conceptually sound. I then focus on the relation between novelty and adaptation in the Modern Synthesis era, and on the relation of novelty to other fundamental biological problems (speciation, origin of higher taxa, complexity). Pushing this approach further, I challenge the view that the Modern Synthesis excluded development and reached a hardened consensus. Finally, I analyse how Günter Wagner's developmental theory of novelty applies to novelties in plant.

Resumo: O conceito de evolução biológica atualmente constituir-se um eixo unificador do conhecimento biológico, pois fornece subsídios para compreensão da biologia atual e possibilita a interpretação dos múltiplos cenários que se formaram desde a origem da vida até os dias atuais. Os Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais do Ensino Médio, também, orientam que a evolução biológica seja um conceito unficador da biologia, uma vez que, a compreensão da teoria evolutiva pode se interligar a outros conceitos biológicos e, assim, propiciar um ensino menos fragmentado. Diversas pesquisas apontam que os alunos tem dificuldades de compreensão ou aceitação do conceito de evolução. Uma das razões que contribuem para esta dificuldade de compreensão dos históricos presentes nos livros didáticos. Sendo assim, objetivou-se investigar como a inserção de uma discussão epistemológica sobre o conceito de evolução biológica pode contribuir para a aprendizagem de alunos de graduação de licenciatura em ciências biológicas. Para esta dissertação, os instrumentos de pesquisa utilizados foram os questionários, entrevistas semi-estruturadas, e discussões em grupos focais sobre os temas propostos, nas quais questões gerais foram focadas em três eixos: Evolução, História da Biologia e Ensino. Após análise coleta inicial foi possível criar categorias que permitiram agrupar resposta com padrões de explicação similares. Em seguida foram feitas intervenção didáticas, utilizando-se um material didático, organizado pelos autores desta pesquisa, contendo textos da História e Filosofia da Biologia sobre o conceito de evolução biológica. A partir da coleta final pôde-se, então, fazer uma análise comparativa dos dados iniciais, com a finalidade de se observar quais e como os objetivos propostos foram atendidos com a intervenção didática. Ao final desta pesquisa foi possível ... (Resumo completo, clicar acesso eletrônico abaixo) / Abstract: The concept of biological evolution currently consist in an unifying axis of the biological knowledge, therefore providing subsidies to comprehend actual biology and making possible interpretation of the multiple scenes that were constitute since the origin of life until the nowadays. The National Curricular Parameters of High School, also, suggest that the biological evolution is a unifying concept of biology, because, understanding of the evaluative theory can establish a connection with other biological concepts and thus promote a less fragmented education. Many researches point that the pupils have difficulties to understand or accept of evolution, being one of reasons that contribute to this difficulty of understanding of related concepts to the theory of evolution, appertain to the misconceptions present in textbooks. Wherefore, it was aimed to investigate as an insertion of an epistemological discussion on the concept of biological evolution can contribute to learning of students in pre-service teachers' education in biology's graduation. For this dissertation, it was used questionnaire, semi-structuralized interviews, and discussion in focal groups about considered subjects, which general questions had been concentrated in three axles: Evolution, History of Biology and Education. After initial analysis of the data, it was possible to create categories that allowed the group to give answers with similar explanations standard. After they were made dicactic intervention, using a didactic textbook organized by the authors of this research, it having texts of History and Philosophy of Biology about the concept of biological evolution. From the finals data a comparative analysis of the initial data could be made, with purpose of observing which and how they considered aims had been reached with the didactic intervention. In the end of this research it was possible ... (Complete abstract click electronic access below) / Orientador: Ana Maria de Andrade Caldeira / Coorientador: Fernanda Aparecida Meglhioratti / Banca: Vivian Leyser da Rosa / Banca: Jehud Bortolozzi / Mestre

Orientador: Marcelo Carbone Carneiro / Banca: Fernanda Aparecida Meglhioratti / Banca: Jehud Bortolozzi / Banca: Marcos Rodrigues da Silva / Banca: Osmar Cavassan / Resumo: A tese foi desenvolvida buscando identificar os elementos necessários para uma compreensão da visão biológica sobre a natureza, numa perspectiva histórica e filosófica. Foi realizado um estudo teórico fundamentado no pensamento materialista dialético, visando identificar as principais questões que sustentam a biologia, considerando a sua história de construção e o olhar da filosofia da ciência sobre ela. Fez-se um levantamento documental principalmente nas fontes secundárias sobre a história e filosofia da biologia, também em algumas fontes primárias. Tendo realizada esta etapa, fez-se uma análise do conteúdo disciplinar dos Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais do Ensino Médio (PCNEM), PCNEM+ e as Orientações Curriculares. O estudo foi direcionado por três questões: Quais são os elementos que caracterizam a biologia como tal ao longo da sua construção? Como estes elementos se caracterizam e se articulam? Os documentos curriculares oficiais consideram estes elementos na sua formulação? Como resultado, é trazida a história das ideias sobre os seres vivos na Antiguidade à Idade Média, sendo possível identificar algumas das questões que a biologia veio a se debruçar nos séculos seguintes. Em seguida, enfatiza-se a mudança ocorrida na visão de mundo na Idade Moderna que se opôs a Escolástica e suas implicações na organizaçãoda ciência que culminou na Revolução Científica. O século XIX marca o surgimento da biologia enquanto ciência. No início do século alguns ramos já se configuravam, porém ainda vinculados com a filosofia da natureza. Constitui-se a partir daí um olhar específico sobre a natureza considerando-se três teorias principais: teoria celular, teoria do equilíbrio interno e a teoria da seleção natural e origens das espécies. Duas perspectivas centrais se estruturaram, uma Mecanicista e outra Histórica, as quais sustentaram ... (Resumo completo, clicar acesso eletrônico abaixo) / Abstract: The thesis was developed in order to identify the elements necessary for an understanding of biological vision about the nature, historical and philosophical perspective. We conducted a theoretical study based on dialectical materialist thought, to identify the key issues underpinning biology, considering its history of construction and look at the philosophy of science about it. There was a documentary survey mainly on secondary sources on the history and philosophy of biology, also in some primary sources. Having performed this step, there was a review of disciplinary content of National Curriculum of Secondary Education (PCNEM) PCNEM + and Curriculum guidelines. The study walked directed by three questions: What are the elements that characterize the biology as such throughout its construction? How these elements are characterized and articulate? Documents of curriculum consider these elements in its formulation? As a result, it brought the history of ideas on living in antiquity to the Middle Ages, it is possibile to identify some of the questions that biology came to look over the following centuries. Then, we seek to emphasize the change in worldview in the modern era who opposed scholasticism and its implications to the science that culminated in the Scientific Revolution. The nineteenth century marks the emergence of biology as a science. At the beginning of the century there were already some branches, but still tied to the philosophy of nature. It consists from there a specific look on nature by considering three main theories: cell theory, theory of internal equilibrium and the theory of natural selection and origin of species. Two central perspectives are structured, a Mechanistic and another Historic, which ... (Complete abstract click electronic access below) / Doutor

abstract: At the interface of developmental biology and evolutionary biology, the very criteria of scientific knowledge are up for grabs. A central issue is the status of evolutionary genetics models, which some argue cannot coherently be used with complex gene regulatory network (GRN) models to explain the same evolutionary phenomena. Despite those claims, many researchers use evolutionary genetics models jointly with GRN models to study evolutionary phenomena. How do those researchers deploy those two kinds of models so that they are consistent and compatible with each other? To address that question, this dissertation closely examines, dissects, and compares two recent research projects in which researchers jointly use the two kinds of models. To identify, select, reconstruct, describe, and compare those cases, I use methods from the empirical social sciences, such as digital corpus analysis, content analysis, and structured case analysis. From those analyses, I infer three primary conclusions about projects of the kind studied. First, they employ an implicit concept of gene that enables the joint use of both kinds of models. Second, they pursue more epistemic aims besides mechanistic explanation of phenomena. Third, they don’t work to create and export broad synthesized theories. Rather, they focus on phenomena too complex to be understood by a common general theory, they distinguish parts of the phenomena, and they apply models from different theories to the different parts. For such projects, seemingly incompatible models are synthesized largely through mediated representations of complex phenomena. The dissertation closes by proposing how developmental evolution, a field traditionally focused on macroevolution, might fruitfully expand its research agenda to include projects that study microevolution. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Biology 2017

<p>Currently, there is significant divergence in scholarly opinion as to whether or not human nature exists. In my PhD thesis, I argue for the existence of human nature. In so doing, I critique rival views on human nature and orthodox entry points into the issue. I also offer a partial explanation as to why such a strong divergence of expert opinion may exist, and argue that accuracy on the issue is important with respect to individual and collective problem solving. The view of human nature I defend is what I call ‘ecological.’ This construct aligns with the fact that biological systems exist at multiple levels of organization and relative to varying ecologies, developmental stages, frames of reference, and viable systems of orientation. Given this, I contend human nature is not something that ‘inheres’ and projects out from the organism; rather, human nature is diffuse and exists at simultaneous levels of biological organization, and at the intersection of genetic and epigenetic factors, past and present, and scientific truth and pragmatism.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Le concept d’écosystème joue un rôle fondamental dans la réflexion environnementale actuelle. En effet, la façon dont nous le comprenons influence directement les pratiques de conservation et de restauration utilisées en écologie. Les importantes perturbations que subissent les écosystèmes dans le contexte de la crise climatique actuelle amènent les écologues à s’interroger sur les composantes nécessaires d’un écosystème stable (Pesson 1978, 4; Larrère 1994, 33), la conception écosystémique de la nature étant souvent liée à l’idée que cette dernière doit être équilibrée (Blandin 2009, 38). Or, l’aspect polysémique du concept d’équilibre rend son utilisation un peu ambiguë et demande de plus amples précisions (Lepart 1994, 139). Cette idéologie semble être de plus en plus débattue dans le contexte de la conservation, puisqu’un état d’équilibre n’empêche pas la fragilité d’un écosystème (Pesson 1978, 5) et que la présence d’équilibre naturel a également été remise en question (Lepart 1994, 132). En ce qui concerne le concept d’écosystème, le fait que chacun d’entre eux soit unique rend la tâche de définition complexe, car il existe autant de types d’écosystèmes qu’il y a d’écosystèmes (Maris 2010, 63). Cette grande diversité rend également difficile la tentative de définir un critère universel d’équilibre écosystémique, si un tel critère est réellement possible. Ce projet de recherche vise d’abord à mettre de l’avant les différentes façons dont les concepts d’équilibre et d’écosystème ont été mobilisés en épistémologie contemporaine de l’écologie. Il sera ensuite possible d’esquisser une réponse à la question de l’applicabilité du concept d’équilibre à la réalité des écosystèmes. / The concept of ecosystem plays a fundamental role in current environmental thinking. Indeed, the way we understand it directly influences the conservation and restoration practices used in ecology. The significant disturbances that ecosystems are undergoing in the context of the current climate crisis lead ecologists to question the necessary components of a stable ecosystem (Pesson 1978, 4; Larrère 1994, 33), the ecosystemic conception of nature often being linked to the idea that the latter must be balanced (Blandin 2009, 38). However, the polysemous aspect of the concept of balance make its use a little ambiguous and requires further clarification (Lepart 1994, 139). This ideology seems to be increasingly debated in the context of conservation, since a state of equilibrium does not prevent the fragility of an ecosystem (Pesson 1978, 5) and the presence of natural balance has also been questioned (Lepart 1994, 132). Regarding the concept of ecosystem, the fact that each of them is unique makes the task of defining them complex, because there are as many types of ecosystems as there are ecosystems (Maris 2010, 63). This great diversity also makes it difficult in the attempt to define a universal criterion of a balanced ecosystem, if such a criterion is really possible. This research project aims first to highlight the different ways in which the concepts of balance and ecosystem have been used in the contemporary epistemology of ecology. It will then be possible to outline an answer to the question of the applicability of the concept of balance to the reality of ecosystems.

Thèse numérisée par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal.