Week 4 Day 1 History of Biology Case Study

Today's lesson requires a case study dealing with spontaneous generation including a lengthy reading from Farley consisting of chapters 1-6. There is also an optional reading of a paper dealing with Pasteur, which I obtained, read, and will discuss. Spontaneous generation has always been one of my favorite topics to both teach and study, for several reasons. Much of modern microbiology's tools and techniques came about due to scientists studying this topic, and some of science's classic experiments arose from this area of investigation. Students' interest can be heightened with descriptions of some of the experiments and opinions concerning this topic, and there is the potential conundrum that after working so hard and long to "disprove" spontaneous generation, at least under the conditions of the earth today, it is still a relevant topic concerning how life may have originated on earth and even on other planets, as we begin to reach and study them closely.

I learned several important points right away in the introduction, specifically the difference between abiogenesis and heterogenesis, and why the distinction is important. This becomes especially crucial when Pasteur undertakes work in this area. Farley also explains the significance of the term "by chance" as part of the definition of spontaneous generation and how the meaning has changed over the years. He is also determined to point out the Whiggish tendencies inherent in how this topic has been presented over time in textbooks and by teachers, including myself. As I continued reading I learned that parasitic worms and their reproduction played a major role in the debate concerning spontaneous generation, and this was a consideration I had not encountered before. It dawned on me while reading that this subject provides an interesting window into science in general, its history, and most of the philosophies and movements I have come across this summer. So many of the names and ideas from previous readings were to be found in these chapters from Farley that I have almost come to regard spontaneous generation as being central to the development and history of science, and of course in particular biology.

I learned more about the Naturphilosophen, the concept of unity, and the Germans' work with parasitic worms and belief in spontaneous generation. At around the same time Lamarck and Cuvier were disagreeing on this topic in France, apparently with major political and societal implications. Concurrently in Britain there was strong theology-based oppostion to spontaneous generation, and Priestly and his experiments are prominently discussed. Farley concludes that the notion that Redi and Spallanzani had reduced spontaneous generation to an archaic argument in the early 1800s is absurd, as it goes on into the 20th century in some cases.

Yeast seemed to become a major part of the controversy as the 1800s progressed, and workers such as Schleiden, Schwann, Muller, Virchow, Dujardin, and Pasteur begin to enter into the reading at this point. I am beginning to see how throughout this century spontaneous generation vacillated between acceptance and rejection. Farley states that even though Pasteur seemingly laid the idea to rest in the 1860s, this primarily applied to France, and it actually made a comeback in England and Germany. The reading concludes by discussing Pasteur and his famous experiments, and some I did not know about. It was interesting how the author ties so much of this chapter to the politics of the time as well, particularly regarding Pasteur. This reading is driving home the point for me that I would definitely benefit from one of the general history of science overview courses, and possibly even more in the philosophy of science. The names, concepts, and time frames can almost be overwhelming sometimes.

The essay on Pateur provided several memorable points for me to discuss. I didn't realize Pasteur worked in such a variety of scientific areas, especially physics, as I knew of him mainly due to his work in microbiology. The authors do point out that his work in this area did flow into his later work for which he is better known. The notion I have learned this summer about consulting original sources still holds true, in this case a detailed discussion of Pateur's lab notebooks, with the caveat that even Pasteur was prone to dramatic flourishes and political maneuvering sometimes in recounting his studies. Of course I learned quite a bit about how optical isomers were first discovered, Auguste Laurent, and I also found out Pasteur was something of a political creature. Another point I would emphasize from this reading is that this is another of those famous, supposed "Eureka!" moments in science that in reality was a cumulative and painstaking longterm process, that also depended to some extent on the previous work of others.

Bibliographic Note:

John Farley,The Spontaneous Generation Controversy from Descartes to Oparin, (Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977). According to John Farley, the most accepted definition of spontaneous generation is "that some living entities may arise suddenly by chance from matter independently of any parent". As a part of the history of science, the story of spontaneous generation, which can be traced back to Aristotle, has been seen as a "classic" case of how modern scientific techniques debunked a persistent myth.

Gerald L. Geison and James A. Secord, "Pasteur and the Process of Discovery", Isis, 79 (1988): 6-36. An essay on whether Pasteur's socio-political concerns helped motivate the direction of his research.

Further Reading Note:

Upon my next visit to the collections I would like to view any available original works by Pasteur, Tyndall, Spallanzani, Redi, and anyone else associated with the idea of abiogenesis.