El embarazo en filosofía de la biologíaun enfoque organísmico relacional

  1. Arantza Etxeberria Agiriano 1
  2. David Cortés-García 1
  1. 1 Universidad del País Vasco UPV/EHU
Revue:
Ludus vitalis: revista de filosofía de las ciencias de la vida = journal of philosophy of life sciences = revue de philosophie des sciences de la vie

ISSN: 1133-5165

Année de publication: 2024

Volumen: 30

Número: 1

Pages: 1-22

Type: Article

DOI: 10.22370/LV.2024.30.1.4492 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAccès ouvert editor

D'autres publications dans: Ludus vitalis: revista de filosofía de las ciencias de la vida = journal of philosophy of life sciences = revue de philosophie des sciences de la vie

Résumé

El embarazo es un tema relativamente novedoso en los debates filosóficos. Introducido fundamentalmente desde perspectivas feministas, plantea desafíos a las posiciones tradicionales. Consideramos que la exploración de estas cuestiones es especialmente para la filosofía de la biología, pues obliga a reconsiderar la naturaleza de la reproducción, así como la concepción convencional de la biología del embarazo, y a revisar cómo la literatura más reciente sobre su evolución obliga a cambiar el modelo. Este trabajo sostiene que el estudio filosófico del embarazo tiene el potencial de transformar significativamente los debates actuales en la filosofía de la biología. En particular, puede reformular nuestra comprensión de los organismos y sus procesos, afectando conceptos clave como la individualidad, las relaciones inter-organísmicas, la temporalidad, la historicidad y la fisión.

Références bibliographiques

  • Anderson, E., Willett, C., & Meyers, D. (2021). Feminist Perspectives on the Self. En E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2021). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/feminism-self/
  • Bainbridge, D. R. J. (2014). The evolution of pregnancy. Early Human Development, 90(11), 741-745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2014.08.013
  • Blackburn, D. G. (2015). Evolution of vertebrate viviparity and specializations for fetal nutrition: A quantitative and qualitative analysis. Journal of Morphology, 276(8), 961-990. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmor.20272
  • Chavan, A. R., Griffith, O. W., & Wagner, G. P. (2017). The inflammation paradox in the evolution of mammalian pregnancy: Turning a foe into a friend. Current Opinion in Genetics & Development, 47, 24-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gde.2017.08.004
  • Chavan, A. R., Griffith, O. W., Stadtmauer, D. J., Maziarz, J., Pavlicev, M., Fishman, R., Koren, L., Romero, R., & Wagner, G. P. (2021). Evolution of Embryo Implantation Was Enabled by the Origin of Decidual Stromal Cells in Eutherian Mammals. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 38(3), 1060-1074. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msaa274
  • Chiu, L., & Gilbert, S. F. (2015). The Birth of the Holobiont: Multi-species Birthing Through Mutual Scaffolding and Niche Construction. Biosemiotics, 8(2), 191-210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12304-015-9232-5
  • Cortés-García, David (2023). Homología y convergencia en la evolución de la viviparidad: consecuencias para un análisis relacional de la ontología de la reproducción. Revista de la Sociedad de Lógica, Metodología y Filosofía de la Ciencia en España, Número Especial Febrero, pp. 12-15.
  • Cortés-García, D., Etxeberria, A. & Nuño de la Rosa, L. (2024) The evolution of reproductive characters: an organismal-relational approach. Biol. Philos., 39, 26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-024-09961-1
  • Dawkins, R. (1976). The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press.
  • DiFrisco, J., & Mossio, M. (2020). Diachronic identity in complex life cycles: an organizational perspective. En A. S. Meincke & J. Dupré (Eds.), Biological Identity: Perspectives from Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Biology (pp. 177-199). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351066389
  • Dupré, J., & O’Malley, M. A. (2009). Varieties of Living Things: Life at the Intersection of Lineage and Metabolism. Philosophy and Theory in Biology, 1(3). https://doi.org/10.3998/ptb.6959004.0001.003
  • Etxeberria Agiriano, A. (2023). Jacob’s Understanding of Reproduction: Challenges from an Organismic Collaborative Framework. HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science, 13(2), 535-553. https://doi.org/10.1086/726256
  • Etxeberria Agiriano, A., Cortés-García, D., & Torres Aldave, M. (2023). Organisms, Life Relations, and Evolution: Inter-Dependencies after Kropotkin’s Mutual Aid. ArtefaCToS. Revista de estudios sobre la ciencia y la tecnología, 12(1), 179-204. https://doi.org/10.14201/art2023121179204
  • Finn, S. (2021). Methodology for the metaphysics of pregnancy. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 11(3), 69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-021-00378-1
  • Fusco, G., & Minelli, A. (2019). The Biology of Reproduction. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108758970
  • Fusco, G., & Minelli, A. (2023). Understanding Reproduction. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009225922
  • Furness, A. I., Morrison, K. R., Orr, T. J., Arendt, J. D., & Reznick, D. N. (2015). Reproductive mode and the shifting arenas of evolutionary conflict. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1360(1), 75-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12835
  • Geddes, A. (2023). Pregnancy, Parthood and Proper Overlap: A Critique of Kingma. The Philosophical Quarterly, 73(2), 476-491. https://doi.org/10.1093/pq/pqac044
  • Gilbert, S. F., Sapp, J., & Tauber, A. I. (2012). A Symbiotic View of Life: We Have Never Been Individuals. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 87(4), 325-341. https://doi.org/10.1086/668166
  • Griesemer, J. R. (2000). Reproduction and the Reduction of Genetics. En P. J. Beurton, R. Falk, & H.-J. Rheinberger (Eds.), The Concept of the Gene in Development and Evolution: Historical and Epistemological Perspectives (pp. 240-285). Cambridge University Press.
  • Griesemer, J. (2014). Reproduction and scaffolded developmental processes: An integrated evolutionary perspective. En A. Minelli & T. Pradeu (Eds.), Towards a Theory of Development (pp. 183-202). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199671427.003.0012
  • Grose, J. (2020). How Many Organisms during a Pregnancy? Philosophy of Science, 87(5), 1049-1060. https://doi.org/10.1086/710542
  • Grunstra, N. D. S., Betti, L., Fischer, B., Haeusler, M., Pavlicev, M., Stansfield, E., Trevathan, W., Webb, N. M., Wells, J. C. K., Rosenberg, K. R., & Mitteroecker, P. (2023). There is an obstetrical dilemma: Misconceptions about the evolution of human childbirth and pelvic form. American Journal of Biological Anthropology, 181(4), 535-544. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.24802
  • Haig, D. (1993). Genetic Conflicts in Human Pregnancy. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 68(4), 495-532. https://doi.org/10.1086/418300
  • Howes, M. (2008). Conceptualizing the Maternal-Fetal Relationship in Reproductive Immunology. En K. Kroker, J. Keelan, & P. Mazumdar (Eds.), Crafting Immunity: Working Histories of Clinical Immunology. Ashgate.
  • Jacob, F. (1970). La logique du vivant. Gallimard.
  • Keller, E. F. (2009). It Is Possible to Reduce Biological Explanations to Explanations in Chemistry and/or Physics. En F. J. Ayala & R. Arp (Eds.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology (pp. 19-31). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444314922.ch1
  • Kingma, E. (2019). Were You a Part of Your Mother? Mind, 128(511), 609-646. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzy087
  • Kingma, E. (2020). Biological Individuality, Pregnancy, and (Mammalian) Reproduction. Philosophy of Science, 87(5), 1037-1048. https://doi.org/10.1086/710612
  • Kukla, Q. R., & Wayne, K. (2023). Pregnancy, Birth, and Medicine. En E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2023). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2023/entries/ethics-pregnancy/
  • Lymer, J. (2016). The phenomenology of gravidity: Reframing pregnancy and the maternal through Merleau-Ponty, Levinas and Derrida. Rowman & Littlefield International.
  • Male, V. (2021). Medawar and the immunological paradox of pregnancy: In context. Oxford Open Immunology, 2(1), iqaa006. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfimm/iqaa006
  • Martínez-Quintero, A., & De Jaegher, H. (2020). Pregnant Agencies: Movement and Participation in Maternal–Fetal Interactions. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1977. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01977
  • Maturana, H. & Varela, F. (1984). El árbol del conocimiento. Editorial Universitaria.
  • McConwell, A. K. (2023). Biological Individuality. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108942775
  • Meincke, A. S. (2022). One or two? A Process View of pregnancy. Philosophical Studies, 179(5), 1495-1521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-021-01716-y
  • Mor, G., & Cardenas, I. (2010). The Immune System in Pregnancy: A Unique Complexity. American Journal of Reproductive Immunology, 63(6), 425-433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0897.2010.00836.x
  • Mor, G., Aldo, P., & Alvero, A. B. (2017). The unique immunological and microbial aspects of pregnancy. Nature Reviews Immunology, 17(8), 469-482. https://doi.org/10.1038/nri.2017.64
  • Nuño De La Rosa, L. (2010). Becoming organisms: The organisation of development and the development of organisation. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 32(2-3), 289-315.
  • Nuño De La Rosa, L. (2023). Agency in Reproduction. Evolution & Development, 25(6), 418-429. https://doi.org/10.1111/ede.12440
  • Nuño De La Rosa, L., Pavličev, M., & Etxeberria, A. (2021). Pregnant Females as Historical Individuals: An Insight From the Philosophy of Evo-Devo. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 572106. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.572106
  • Pavličev, M., Romero, R., & Mitteroecker, P. (2020). Evolution of the human pelvis and obstructed labor: New explanations of an old obstetrical dilemma. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 222(1), 3-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2019.06.043
  • Pradeu, T. (2016). Organisms or biological individuals? Combining physiological and evolutionary individuality. Biology & Philosophy, 31(6), 797-817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-016-9551-1
  • Smith, B., & Brogaard, B. (2003). Sixteen Days. The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 28(1), 45-78. https://doi.org/10.1076/jmep.28.1.45.14172
  • Stone, A. (2007). An introduction to feminist philosophy. Polity Press.
  • Trivers, R. L. (1974). Parent-Offspring Conflict. American Zoologist, 14(1), 249-264. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/14.1.249
  • Triviño, V., & Nuño De La Rosa, L. (2016). A causal dispositional account of fitness. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 38(3), 6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-016-0102-5
  • Villarmea, S. (2021). Reasoning from the Uterus: Casanova, Women’s Agency, and the Philosophy of Birth. Hypatia, 36(1), 22-41. https://doi.org/10.1017/hyp.2020.45
  • Wagner, G. P., Kin, K., Muglia, L., & Pavli, M. (2014). Evolution of mammalian pregnancy and the origin of the decidual stromal cell. The International Journal of Developmental Biology, 58(2-3-4), 117-126. https://doi.org/10.1387/ijdb.130335gw
  • Young, I. M. (2005). Pregnant Embodiment: Subjectivity and Alienation. En I. M. Young, On Female Body Experience (pp. 46-62). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0195161920.003.0004
La source de données: Dialnet