Browsing by Author "Vecchi, Davide"
Now showing 1 - 10 of 12
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- Collective individuation and emergence of organismalityPublication . Hernández, Isaac; Vecchi, Davide
- DNA is not an ontologically distinctive developmental causePublication . Vecchi, DavideIn this article I critically evaluate the thesis that DNA is an ontologically distinctive developmental cause. I shall critically analyse different versions of the latter thesis by taking into consideration concrete developmental cases. I shall argue that DNA is neither a developmental determinant nor an ontologically distinctive developmental cause. Instead, I shall argue that mechanistic analysis shows that DNA's causal role in development depends on the higher robustness of the developmental processes in which it exerts its causal capacities. The focus on process and developmental system implies a metaphysical shift: rather than attributing to DNA molecules biochemically unique properties, I suggest that it might be better to think about DNA's causal role in development in terms of the causal capacities that DNA molecules manifest in a rich developmental milieu. I shall also suggest that my position is distinct both from the view advocating the instrumental primacy of DNA-centric biology and developmental constructionism. It is different from the former because it provides a substantial answer to the question of what makes DNA causally central in developmental processes. Finally, I argue that evolutionary considerations pose an important challenge to developmental constructionism.
- Drift as a Force of Evolution: A Manipulationist AccountPublication . Baravalle, Lorenzo; Vecchi, DavideCan evolutionary theory be properly characterised as a “theory of forces”, like Newtonian mechanics? One common criticism to this claim concerns the possibility to conceive genetic drift as a causal process endowed by a specific magnitude and direction. In this article, we aim to offer an original response to this criticism by pointing out a connection between the notion of force and the notion of explanatory depth, as depicted in Hitchcock and Woodward’s manipulationist account of causal explanation. In a nutshell, our argument is that, since force-explanations can be consistently reframed as deep explanations and vice versa, and the notion of drift can be characterised in manipulationist terms as constitutively intervening in evolutionary deep explanations, then drift-explanations can be consistently reframed as force-explanations, and drift can be properly considered as a force of evolution. Insofar as similar considerations may be extended also to other evolutionary factors – chiefly selection –, our analysis offers an important support to the claim that evolutionary theory is a theory of forces.
- Evidence-Based Policies? The Covid 19 Pandemic and the Prospects of Evidence IntegrationPublication . Airoldi, Giorgio; Vecchi, Davide
- Herd Immunity: History, Concepts, and Ethical RationalePublication . Vecchi, Davide; Airoldi, Giorgio
- Organismality grounds species collective responsibilityPublication . Vecchi, Davide
- A relational-constructionist account of protein macrostructure and functionPublication . Santos, Gil; Vallejos, Gabriel; Vecchi, DavideOne of the foundational problems of biochemistry concerns the conceptualisation of the relationship between the composition, structure and function of macromolecules like proteins. Part of the recent philosophical literature displays a reductionist bias, that is, the endorsement of a form of microstructuralism mirroring an out-dated biochemical conceptualisation. We shall argue that such microstructuralist approaches are ultimately committed to a potentialist form of micro-predeterminism whereby the macrostructure and function of proteins is accounted for solely in terms of the intrinsic properties and potentialities of the components of the primary structure as if they were self-contained or essentially immutable entities. We shall instead suggest that a conceptualisation of the relationship between proteins’ composition, structure and function consistent with contemporary biochemical practice should account also for the causal role of the cellular, organismal and environmental relations in protein development. The analysis of the folding process we propose suggests that microstructure-laden reductionist approaches are ontologically indefensible. Rather than a potentialist form of micro-predeterminism, our analysis ultimately supports a relational-construction-based view of protein development and potentialities formation, which requires an indispensable analysis of the dynamical interplay between the micro-level of the parts and the macro-level of the relational structures of their systems.
- A relational-constructionist account of protein macrostructure and functionPublication . C. Santos, Gil; Vecchi, Davide; Vallejos, Gabriel
- The Interactive Construction of Biological Individuality Through Biotic EntrenchmentPublication . Hernández, Isaac; Vecchi, Davide
- The Multi-Causal Basis of Developmental Potential ConstructionPublication . Vecchi, Davide; Santos, GilIn this article we analyse the issue of what accounts for developmental potential, i.e., the possible phenotypes a developing organism can manifest during ontogeny. We shall argue in favour of two theses. First, although the developing organism is the unit of development, the complete causal basis for its potential to develop does neither lie entirely in itself as a whole nor in any specific part of itself (such as its genome). Thus, the extra-organismal environment must be counted as one of the three necessary, partial and complementary causal bases for development potential. Secondly, we shall defend a constructivist view of the developmental process. If the genome, the developing organism and the extra-organismal environment are to be counted as proper elements of the causal basis for an organism’s developmental potential, the latter is not a given. Rather, it is the result of an interaction-based construction, a process sometimes generating genuine developmental novelty. We will thus argue for an interactionist multi-causal basis view of developmental potential construction. We contend that our view provides a biologically tenable and metaphysically coherent account of developmental dynamics.