Teaser
“While we do not necessarily need strictly hypothesis-driven investigation, thoughtful, curiosity-driven research is a must. If we continue the way we are currently going, we run the danger of ending up with massive mountains of big data that nobody can interpret. Systems biology should not reinforce this trend, but rather provide new ways for making sense of life. What we need is a more balanced combination of theory and experimental practice, and more adequate communication between them. The philosophy of biology should certainly be of help in this context. Philosophers and theoreticians have made important contributions to highlight the importance of theory in disciplines where it is generally underrated. Unfortunately, the message is all too rarely heard within the community of experimental biologists. In my view, this must change if systems biology is to achieve its true potential.”
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
I think it’s difficult to overestimate how far ahead of their time John Reinitz, with associates Eric Mjolsness and David H. Sharp, were when developing their connectionist modeling approach in the early 1990s. Doing this sort of science was not at all fashionable at the time. In fact, it was considered to be impossible and outright crazy.
- 2.
Although it was still not commonly called that in the early 2000s. We were doing “functional genomics”.
- 3.
Greek and modern atomism, the fundamental particles of physics, or genes as particulate carriers of inherited character traits come to mind.
- 4.
One is reminded of NASA’s “faster, better, cheaper” philosophy that managed to crash space probes into Mars at an ever increasing frequency. This notion of efficiency (and its implied expectation of a free lunch) shows remarkable similarities to the situation in science today. The effects will be predictably and depressingly similar as well.
- 5.
Rescher (1996) points out that if you could predict future scientific discoveries, you would already have made them!
- 6.
Think of the laser, positrons, or thermophilic enzymes, all discovered serendipitously by scientists unconcerned with their potential applications, which took decades to have their massive scientific, technological and/or societal impact.
- 7.
The notion of “causal-mechanistic explanation” used here is somewhat similar to the neo-mechanical philosophy of science, but with a stronger emphasis on dynamics and explicit formulation in mathematical terms (see Jaeger and Sharpe 2014 for details).
- 8.
It is important to stress that other disciplines within the life sciences, such as physiology, evolutionary biology, or neuroscience, exhibit a much more mature balance between theoretical and experimental work.
- 9.
This work also resulted in the only Nobel Prizes that systems biologists have won so far.
- 10.
Understanding goes beyond being able to simulate a process. We want to avoid the kind of systems biology that replaces a complex biological system that we do not understand with a complex computational system that we do not understand.
References
Giere, R. N. (2006). Scientific perspectivism. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Hodgkin, A. L., & Huxley, A. F. (1952). Propagation of electrical signals along giant nerve fibres. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 140, 177–183.
Jaeger, J., & Crombach, A. (2012). Life’s attractors: Understanding developmental systems through reverse engineering and in silico evolution. In O. Soyer (Ed.), Evolutionary systems biology (pp. 93–120). Berlin: Springer.
Jaeger, J., & Monk, N. (2014). Bioattractors: Dynamical systems theory and the evolution of regulatory processes. Journal of Physiology, 592, 2267–2281.
Jaeger, J., & Sharpe, J. (2014). On the concept of mechanism in development. In A. Minelli & T. Pradeu (Eds.), Towards a theory of development (pp. 56–78). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jaeger, J., Blagov, M., Kosman, D., Kozlov, K. N., Manu, Myasnikova, E., … Reinitz, J. (2004a). Dynamical analysis of regulatory interactions in the gap gene system of Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics, 167, 1721–1737.
Jaeger, J., Surkova, S., Blagov, M., Janssens, H., Kosman, D., Kozlov, K. N., … Reinitz, J. (2004b). Dynamic control of positional information in the early Drosophila embryo. Nature, 430, 368–371.
Lander, A. D. (2010). The edges of understanding. BMC Biology, 8, 40.
Rescher, N. (1996). Process metaphysics – An introduction to process philosophy. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Suggested Readings by Johannes Jaeger
Green, S., Fagan, M., & Jaeger, J. (2015). Explanatory integration challenges in evolutionary systems biology. Biological Theory, 10, 18–35.
Jaeger, J., & Crombach, A. (2012). Life’s attractors: Understanding developmental systems through reverse engineering and in silico evolution. In O. Soyer (Ed.), Evolutionary systems biology. Berlin: Springer.
Jaeger, J., & Monk, N. (2015). Everything flows: A process perspective on life. EMBO Reports, 16, 1064–1067.
Acknowledgments
I thank Anton Crombach, Hilde Janssens, Nick Monk, James Sharpe, Berta Verd and Adam Wilkins for inspiring discussions and/or useful feedback on this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jaeger, J. (2017). The Importance of Being Dynamic: Systems Biology Beyond the Hairball. In: Green, S. (eds) Philosophy of Systems Biology. History, Philosophy and Theory of the Life Sciences, vol 20. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47000-9_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47000-9_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-46999-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-47000-9
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)