The Philosophy of Science Association (PSA) has recently noted that individually and collectively, philosophers of science could be doing more to engage the public. This is partly explained by the relatively low level of value academic research universities place on outreach and popular writing. The research topics that philosophers of science have prioritized also likely plays a role. This is illustrated in a shift in the PSA's stated mission in it's by-laws, as pointed out by Heather Douglas on the PSA's history page. In 1948, the PSA sought to further "the study and discussion of the subject of philosophy of science, broadly interpreted, and the encouragement of practical consequences which may flow therefrom of benefit to scientists and philosophers in particular and to men of good will in general." (Phil. Sci. 1948, vol. 15, p. 176). By 1959, however, this mission had shifted toward the pursuit of philosophy of science on its own terms: "The objects of this Association shall be the furthering of studies and free discussion from diverse standpoints in the field of philosophy of science, and the publishing of a periodical devoted to such studies in this field. (Philosophy of Science, 1959, vol. 26, p. 63)."
Since this time, philosophers of biology have predominantly been engaged with scientists reflecting on the theoretical foundations of their fields rather than topics involving biological research of importance to society. However, many philosophers of biology have made important contributions to public knowledge and discussion, for example on human evolution. Nevertheless, increasing interest in scientific practice and science policy has arguably helped expand the amount of public philosophy being done in the field, but we lack a clear picture of what has changed in how philosophy of biology is taught, which topics dominate in the literature, and how addressing issues of public significance is viewed as important to the field's identity and aims.
Project activities would include: 1) Studying which topics are covered in historical textbooks, 2) Which readings and topics are emphasized in classes according to publicly available course syllabi, 3) Content analysis of published research in key journals, 4) Analyzing how researchers reflecting on the field's history and future position its value to academia and society.
Benson, Keith R. “Biology’s ‘Phoenix’: Historical Perspectives on the Importance of the Organism.” Integrative and Comparative Biology 29, no. 3 (August 1, 1989): 1067–74. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/29.3.1067.
Bognon-Küss, Cécilia, and Charles T. Wolfe. Philosophy of Biology Before Biology. Routledge, 2019.
Boundas, Constantin V. Columbia Companion to Twentieth-Century Philosophies. Columbia University Press, 2009.
Brigandt, Ingo. “Philosophy of Biology.” In The Continuum Companion to the Philosophy of Science, edited by Steven French and Juha Saatsi, n.d.
Callebaut, Werner. “Again, What the Philosophy of Biology Is Not.” Acta Biotheoretica 53, no. 2 (June 2005): 93–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-005-5352-7.
———. “Naturalizing Theorizing: Beyond a Theory of Biological Theories.” Biological Theory 7, no. 4 (June 2013): 413–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-013-0122-2.
———. “Transcendental Niche Construction.” Acta Biotheoretica 55, no. 1 (March 2007): 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-007-9011-z.
Chen, Bohang. “A Non-Metaphysical Evaluation of Vitalism in the Early Twentieth Century.” History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 40, no. 3 (August 22, 2018): 50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-018-0221-2.
Chung, Carl. “On the Origin of the Typological/Population Distinction in Ernst Mayr’s Changing Views of Species, 1942–1959.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 34, no. 2 (June 2003): 277–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8486(03)00026-8.
Delisle, Richard G. “Ernst Mayr’s Philosophy of Science: Its Connections With Logical Empiricism, the Unity of Science Movement, and the Scientific Revolution,” n.d., 33.
Elgin, Mehmet, and Elliott Sober. “Popper’s Shifting Appraisal of Evolutionary Theory.” HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 7, no. 1 (March 2017): 31–55. https://doi.org/10.1086/691119.
Esposito, Maurizio. “The Organismal Synthesis: Holistic Science and Developmental Evolution in the English-Speaking World, 1915–1954.” In The Darwinian Tradition in Context: Research Programs in Evolutionary Biology, edited by Richard G. Delisle, 219–41. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69123-7_10.
Ferrario, Chiara Elettra. “Goldstein, Kurt.” In ELS, 1–8. American Cancer Society, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470015902.a0026372.
Gayon, Jean. “Philosophy of Biology: An Historico-Critical Characterization.” In French Studies In The Philosophy Of Science, edited by Anastasios Brenner and Jean Gayon, 201–12. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9368-5_9.
Grene, Marjorie Glicksman, and David J. Depew. “The Philosophy of Biology: An Episodic History,” 2004. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.42-5253.
Hey, Jody. “Regarding the Confusion between the Population Concept and Mayr’s ‘Population Thinking.’” The Quarterly Review of Biology 86, no. 4 (December 1, 2011): 253–64. https://doi.org/10.1086/662455.
Hofer, Veronika. “Philosophy of Biology in Early Logical Empiricism.” In New Challenges to Philosophy of Science, edited by Hanne Andersen, Dennis Dieks, Wenceslao J. Gonzalez, Thomas Uebel, and Gregory Wheeler, 351–63. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5845-2_28.
Hull, David L. “Ernst Mayr’s Influence on the History and Philosophy of Biology: A Personal Memoir.” Biology & Philosophy 9, no. 3 (July 1994): 375–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00857944.
———. The History of the Philosophy of Biology. Oxford University Press, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195182057.003.0002.
———. “The Professionalization of Science Studies: Cutting Some Slack.” Biology & Philosophy 15, no. 1 (January 2000): 61–91. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006547510796.
———. “What Philosophy of Biology Is Not.” Synthese 20, no. 2, (1969): 157–84.
Junker, Thomas. “Ernst Mayr (1904-2005) and the New Philosophy of Biology.” Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift Für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 38, no. 1 (2007): 1–17.
———. “Junker-Factors_shaping_Ernst_Mayr’s_concepts_in_the_history_of_biology.Pdf,” 1996. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00129696.
Kolen, Filip, and Gertrudis Van de Vijver. “Philosophy of Biology: Naturalistic or Transcendental?” Acta Biotheoretica 55, no. 1 (March 2007): 35–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-007-9009-6.
Krohs, Ulrich. “Philosophies of Particular Biological Research Programs.” Biological Theory 1, no. 2 (June 2006): 182–87. https://doi.org/10.1162/biot.2006.1.2.182.
Malaterre, Christophe, Jean-François Chartier, and Davide Pulizzotto. “What Is This Thing Called Philosophy of Science? A Computational Topic-Modeling Perspective, 1934–2015.” HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 9, no. 2 (September 1, 2019): 215–49. https://doi.org/10.1086/704372.
Malaterre, Christophe, Davide Pulizzotto, and Francis Lareau. “Revisiting Three Decades of Biology and Philosophy: A Computational Topic-Modeling Perspective.” Biology & Philosophy 35, no. 1 (December 19, 2019): 5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-019-9729-4.
Mayr, Ernst. “Footnotes on the Philosophy of Biology.” Philosophy of Science 36, no. 2 (1969): 197–202.
———. “The Autonomy of Biology: The Position of Biology Among the Sciences.” The Quarterly Review of Biology 71, no. 1 (1996): 97–106.
———. The Growth of Biological Thought: Diversity, Evolution, and Inheritance. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Pr, 1982.
Munson, Ronald. “Is Biology a Provincial Science?” Philosophy of Science 42, no. 4 (1975): 428–47.
NACHTOMY, OHAD. “Leibniz and ‘The Logic of Life.’” Studia Leibnitiana 41, no. 1 (2009): 1–20.
Nicholson, Daniel J., and Richard Gawne. “Neither Logical Empiricism nor Vitalism, but Organicism: What the Philosophy of Biology Was.” History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 37, no. 4 (December 2015): 345–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-015-0085-7.
———. “Rethinking Woodger’s Legacy in the Philosophy of Biology.” Journal of the History of Biology 47, no. 2 (May 2014): 243–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10739-013-9364-x.
O’Malley, Maureen A. “Ernst Mayr, the Tree of Life, and Philosophy of Biology.” Biology & Philosophy 25, no. 4 (September 2010): 529–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-010-9214-6.
Peterson, Erik. “The Conquest of Vitalism or the Eclipse of Organicism? The 1930s Cambridge Organizer Project and the Social Network of Mid-Twentieth-Century Biology.” The British Journal for the History of Science 47, no. 2 (June 2014): 281–304. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007087413000435.
Popper, Karl. “Natural Selection and the Emergence of Mind.” Dialectica 32, no. 3–4 (December 1978): 339–55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-8361.1978.tb01321.x.
Pradeu, Thomas. “Thirty Years of Biology & Philosophy: Philosophy of Which Biology?” Biology & Philosophy 32, no. 2 (March 1, 2017): 149–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-016-9558-7.
———. “What Philosophy of Biology Should Be: Rosenberg, McShea: Philosophy of Biology. A Contemporary Introduction. Routledge, 2008.” Biology & Philosophy 26, no. 1 (January 2011): 119–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-009-9173-y.
Reydon, Thomas A. C. “Philosophy of Biology, German Style: Frankfurt Am Main: Suhrkamp, 2005; 457 Pp., € 16,-(PB), ISBN 3-518-29345-1 (ISBN-13: 978-3-518-29345-4).” Biology & Philosophy 22, no. 4 (July 30, 2007): 619–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-007-9060-3.
Reydon, Thomas A. C., Piet Dullemeijer, and Lia Hemerik. “The History of Acta Biotheoretica and the Nature of Theoretical Biology.” In Current Themes in Theoretical Biology, edited by Thomas A.C. Reydon and Lia Hemerik, 1–8. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2904-7_1.
Riesch, Hauke. “Philosophy, History and Sociology of Science: Interdisciplinary Relations and Complex Social Identities.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 48 (December 2014): 30–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2014.09.013.
Ruse, Michael. “Booknotes.” Biology and Philosophy 8 (1993): 477–83.
———. “David Hull: A Memoir.” Biology & Philosophy 25, no. 5 (November 1, 2010): 739–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-010-9236-0.
———. “David Hull Through Two Decades.” In What the Philosophy of Biology Is: Essays Dedicated to David Hull, edited by Michael Ruse, 1–15. Nijhoff International Philosophy Series. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1169-7_1.
———. “Forty Years a Philosopher of Biology: Why EvoDevo Makes Me Still Excited About My Subject.” Biological Theory 1, no. 1 (March 2006): 35–37. https://doi.org/10.1162/biot.2006.1.1.35.
———. “Karl Popper’s Philosophy of Biology.” Philosophy of Science 44, no. 4 (1977): 638–61.
———. “The Role of Biology in Philosophy: David Livingstone Smith: How Biology Shapes Philosophy: New Foundations for Naturalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017, Xiv + 351 Pp, $99.99HB.” Metascience 26, no. 2 (July 2017): 285–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11016-017-0187-9.
Sartenaer, Olivier. “Disentangling the Vitalism–Emergentism Knot.” Journal for General Philosophy of Science 49, no. 1 (March 2018): 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-017-9361-4.
Settle, Tom. “Popper on ‘When Is a Science Not a Science?’” Systematic Zoology 28, no. 4 (December 1979): 521. https://doi.org/10.2307/2412564.
Shanahan, Timothy. “Selfish Genes and Lucky Breaks: Richard Dawkins’ and Stephen Jay Gould’s Divergent Darwinian Agendas.” In The Darwinian Tradition in Context: Research Programs in Evolutionary Biology, edited by Richard G. Delisle, 11–36. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69123-7_2.
Steen, Wim J. van der. “Forging Links Between Philosophy, Ethics, and the Life Sciences: A Tale of Disciplines and Trenches.” History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 20, no. 2 (1998): 233–48.
Steen, Wim J. van der. “Toward a Practicable Methodology for Medicine: The Impact of Conceptual Analysis.” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 36, no. 4 (1993): 580–91. https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.1993.0049.
Van de Vijver, Gertrudis, Linda Van Speybroeck, Dani De Waele, Filip Kolen, and Helena De Preester. “Philosophy of Biology: Outline of a Transcendental Project.” Acta Biotheoretica 53, no. 2 (June 2005): 57–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-005-5350-9.
Van Speybroeck, Linda. “Philosophy of Biology: About the Fossilization of Disciplines and Other Embryonic Thoughts.” Acta Biotheoretica 55, no. 1 (March 2007): 47–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-007-9010-0.
Winsor, Mary P. “LINNAEUS’S BIOLOGY WAS NOT ESSENTIALIST 1.” Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 93, no. 1 (May 31, 2006): 2–7. https://doi.org/10.3417/0026-6493(2006)93[2:LBWNE]2.0.CO;2.
———. “Non-Essentialist Methods in Pre-Darwinian Taxonomy.” Biology & Philosophy 18, no. 3 (June 2003): 387–400. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024139523966.
Winsor, Mary P. “The Creation of the Essentialism Story: An Exercise in Metahistory” 28 (2006): 149–74.
Witteveen, Joeri. “‘A Temporary Oversimplification’: Mayr, Simpson, Dobzhansky, and the Origins of the Typology/Population Dichotomy (Part 1 of 2).” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 54 (December 2015): 20–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2015.09.007.
———. “‘A Temporary Oversimplification’: Mayr, Simpson, Dobzhansky, and the Origins of the Typology/Population Dichotomy (Part 2 of 2).” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 57 (June 2016): 96–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2015.09.006.
———. “Typological Thinking: Then and Now.” Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution 330, no. 3 (May 2018): 123–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.b.22796.
Wolfe, Charles T. “Was Canguilhem a Biochauvinist? Goldstein, Canguilhem and the Project of Biophilosophy.” In Medicine and Society, New Perspectives in Continental Philosophy, 197–212. Springer, 2015.
Wolters, Gereon. “‘Wrongful Life’ Reloaded: Logical empiricism’s philosophy of biology 1934-1936 (Prague/Paris/Copenhagen).” Philosophia Scientiae 22–3, no. 3 (December 20, 2018): 233–55.
Wray, K. Brad. “Specialization in Philosophy: A Preliminary Study.” Scientometrics 98, no. 3 (March 2014): 1763–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1102-9.
Yang, Andrew S. “Matters of Demarcation: Philosophy, Biology, and the Evolving Fraternity between Disciplines.” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 22, no. 2 (July 2008): 211–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698590802496789.