Camacho MP. Beyond descriptive accuracy: The central dogma of molecular biology in scientific practice.
Stud Hist Philos Sci 2021;
86:20-26. [PMID:
33965660 DOI:
10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.01.002]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2020] [Accepted: 01/02/2021] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
There is no denying the Central Dogma's impact on the biological sciences. Since the Dogma's formulation by Francis Crick in 1958, however, many have debated the Dogma's empirical adequacy. My aim is to move beyond these discussions, and instead consider the Central Dogma's significance to contemporary biological practice. To do this, I consider four distinct approaches for determining the non-descriptive methodological significance of a scientific principle. I argue that these approaches fail to vindicate the Central Dogma, and that, under many of these approaches, the Dogma amounts to a triviality.
Collapse