[ Follow Ups ]
Posted by ramellini on November 15, 1999 at 10:20:16:
In Reply to: Re: Is there an attack against the concept of genetic program? posted by Pierre on November 05, 1999 at 16:22:36:
Dear Pierre, how to conceive heredity without the concept of genetic
program?
In general, a way out to bypass second-level terms like GP is to give a purely
phenomenological description of what concretely happens (n. DNA is a
theoretical or first level term, GP is a metatheoretical or second level term).
For instance, we can describe mitosis saying that, during the interphase, owing
to brownian movements some nucleotides reach a site where a parental DNA helix
has been opened, where a polymerase is attached to a single strand of DNA, and
so on, so that nucleotides become attached to each other, contribute to form
two double F1 helics etc.
Generally, I'm satisfied when I've such descriptions available, even if
speaking about programs, message transmissions and similar concepts is truly
evocative and fascinating; perhaps, this last way of speaking may be considered
as an elliptical, concise, recapitulatory summary of the previous one; it may
play a role in didascalic or propedeutic treatments, but a scholar understanding
cannot leave aside a rigorous phenomenological description.
Another way of thinking to GP is to start again with the question of defining
GP in plain terms. Is it possible to gain a non metaphorical definition of GP?
The first step should be a survey of the definition of 'program' in the field
of informatics; I admit that my cognitions are somewhat hazy, but maybe someone
of HBG participants could help us. Then, we could see if a (as rigorous as
possible) transfert of meaning would be possible from informatics to biology.
Finally, we should investigate the extent and the euristic power of a such
defined term in biology. This way would bring us not to conceive heredity
without GP, but to conceive it with a univocal, not ambiguous concept of GP.
By the way, what is a medline?