Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-rkzlw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-24T15:18:14.151Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On Deciding whether Protistans are Cells

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

John R. Gregg
John R. Gregg*
Affiliation:
Zoology Department, Duke University Durham, North Carolina
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There is a biological controversy of long standing between proponents of the Wilsonian view that all organisms of a certain class have at least one part that is a cell and proponents of the contradictory, or Dobellian, view that some organisms in the same class have no parts that are cells. The controversy is considered from the standpoint of the methodology of explication. It is concluded that on the grounds of prevalent biological usage, precision, utility and generality the Wilsonian view may be defended successfully against attacks that have been made upon it.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 26 , Issue 4 , October 1959 , pp. 338 - 346
Copyright
Copyright © 1959 by Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Baitsell, George A. 1940. A modern concept of the cell as a structural unit. American Naturalist LXXIV: 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Baker, J. R. 1948. The status of the protozoa. Nature 161: 548–551, 587-589.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3. Boyden, Alan. 1957. Are there any “acellular animals”? Science 125: 155–156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Boyden, Alan. 1957. Concerning the “cellularity” or acellularity of the protozoa. Science 125: 990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Carnap, R. 1950. Logical foundations of probability. U. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
6. Corliss, John O. 1957. Concerning the “cellularity” or acellularity of the protozoa. Science 125: 988.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7. Dobell, C. C. 1911. The principles of protistology. Archiv für Protistenkunde 23: 269–310.Google Scholar
8. Hutner, S. H. and Provasoli, L. 1957. Concerning the “cellularity” or acellularity of the protozoa. Science 125: 989.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Luyet, B. 1940. The case against the cell theory. Science 91: 252–255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Martin, G. W. 1957. Concerning the “cellularity” or acellularity of the protozoa. Science 125: 989–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Russell, E. S. 1930. The interpretation of development and heredity. A study in biological method. Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
12. Wilson, E. B. 1925. The cell in development and heredity. 3rd edition. Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar