RESUMO
The history of helminthology in the Early Modern Period has been characterized as a debate between two camps, the internalists and the externalists. The internalists believed that helminths are spontaneously generated within the body of the host, whereas the externalists claimed that helminths enter the host from the external environment. According to the this account, the debate between these two camps ended in the nineteenth century with the victory of the externalist viewpoint. Here, we redefine these two terms, as well as the beliefs that the two groups upheld. We suggest that internalists were not necessarily committed to the theory of spontaneous generation, nor were externalists committed to its rejection. These terms only refer to the place where helminths supposedly originate, but not to the process by which they are generated. Thus, some internalists rejected the theory of spontaneous generation, while others held externalist viewpoints and at the same time accepted this theory. We claim that the debate did not end with the victory of the externalist camp; rather, a new position which we call "life-cyclism", emerged and incorporated some elements of the two earlier positions.
Assuntos
Helmintos , Vida , Vitalismo , Zoologia/história , Animais , História do Século XV , História do Século XVI , História do Século XVII , História do Século XVIII , História do Século XIX , FilosofiaRESUMO
Lakatos's philosophy of science has been used for different branches of biology, however this has not been true for helminthology. Therefore, this article examines the possibility of using his methodology of scientific research programmes (SRP) for reconstructing the history of the discipline of helminthology. It is upheld that the first SRP in biology was inaugurated by Aristotle, and its protective belt included a small group of auxiliary hypotheses referring to helminths. This programme continued up until the 17th century, when two rival programmes in helminthology arose: the internalist and the externalist. After the second half of the 19th century the internalist SRP was abandoned, while the externalist considerably broadened its protective belt during the 20th century. The internalist programme was abandoned due to the crucial experiments of Küchenmeister, which permitted the consolidation of the externalist SRP.
Assuntos
Helmintos , Parasitologia/história , Filosofia/história , Animais , Europa (Continente) , História do Século XV , História do Século XVI , História do Século XVII , História do Século XVIII , História do Século XIX , História do Século XX , História Antiga , História Medieval , HumanosRESUMO
RESUMEN A pesar de que en distintas ramas de la biología se ha utilizado la filosofía de la ciencia de Lakatos, no se ha hecho esto con la helmintología. Aquí utilizamos su metodología de programas de investigación científica (PIC) para reconstruir la historia de la disciplina en cuestión. Sostenemos que el primer PIC de la biología lo inauguró Aristóteles, y en su cinturón protector hay un pequeño grupo de hipótesis auxiliares que se refieren a los helmintos. Ese programa se mantuvo vigente hasta el siglo XVII, época en la que surgen dos PIC rivales en helmintología: el internalista y el externalista. A partir de la segunda mitad del siglo XIX, el PIC internalista fue abandonado, mientras que el externalista amplió considerablemente su cinturón protector durante el siglo XX. El abandono del PIC internalista se debió a los experimentos cruciales de Küchenmeister, que permitieron la consolidación del PIC externalista.
ABSTRACT Lakatos’s philosophy of science has been used for different branches of biology, however this has not been true for helminthology. Therefore, this article examines the possibility of using his methodology of scientific research programmes (SRP) for reconstructing the history of the discipline of helminthology. It is upheld that the first SRP in biology was inaugurated by Aristotle, and its protective belt included a small group of auxiliary hypotheses referring to helminths. This programme continued up until the 17th century, when two rival programmes in helminthology arose: the internalist and the externalist. After the second half of the 19th century the internalist SRP was abandoned, while the externalist considerably broadened its protective belt during the 20th century. The internalist programme was abandoned due to the crucial experiments of Küchenmeister, which permitted the consolidation of the externalist SRP.
