1. Life and the Life Sciences

Within Origins of Life (OoL) research and synthetic biology, scientists are making increasing use of evolutionary language to describe their systems. Simple chemical systems that are thought to capture plausible early stages of life are routinely described as ‘Darwinian’, ‘evolutionary’, or as showing ‘natural selection’ similarly to extant life. How – if at all – can evolutionary theory can be applied to the emergence and development of life? Understanding if and how this is possible requires answering a number of questions: How can contemporary evolutionary theory be applied beyond biology from the perspective of evolutionary theory itself? How should we conceptualize the pre-biological emergence and development of early life to which OoL and synthetic biology researchers are supposedly able to apply (parts of) evolutionary theory? And what is the function of these applications within OoL and synthetic biology research? For an overview of the current state of the field, see my recent review of these issues.

My previous experimental in the life sciences was focused on the functionalization of synthetic cell-like structures, particularly phospholipid vesicles and a variety of biomolecular condensates. One of my other main interests remains connected to this work, namely the nature of definitions of life and their use in the life sciences, where I have previously defended a pragmatic view.

2. Scientific Understanding in Biology

Scientific understanding is an increasingly central concept in epistemology and philosophy of science. However, far and away most of the work on scientific understanding has been focused on the physical sciences. I have recently argued – together with others in a soon to be forthcoming paper – that an understanding-based framework can be fruitfully extended to biology. Currently, I am working on extending this framework in the direction of evolutionary theory as well as behavioural biology.

2.1. Scientific Controversy and Evolutionary Theory

Evolutionary theory is one of our most successful scientific theories. A defining period in its development has been the formulation of the modern synthesis framework, which came to dominate evolutionary biology during the 1940s/1950s. However, the modern synthesis framework was not universally and uncritically accepted. Since the 1970s, various proposals for reform have been put forward, resulting in an ongoing scientific controversy. My suspicion is that this controversy is partly driven by different views of what constitutes scientific understanding held by participants in this controversy. I am currently working on a proof of concept paper defending this claim.

2.2. Philosophy of Behavioural Biology

Behavioural biology has become a mainstay of the biological sciences since the work of Konrad Lorenz and Nicolaas Tinbergen (for which they were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1973, together with Karl von Frisch). Behavioural biology throws up numerous interesting philosophical questions, one of which is on the nature of scientific understanding of animal behaviour. I am currently investigating the role of understanding in this field using a philosophy of science in practice (PSP) approach. During a research stay at the Konrad Lorenz Forschungsstelle (KLF), I have set-up a participant observation study in combination with interviews with behavioural biologists. I am currently writing up the results, as well as working on extending this project.

3. Other Interests

I have a wide range of topics in which I am interested. These include the history of analytic philosophy; the realism/anti-realism/pragmatism debate in philosophy generally and in philosophy of science in particular; and the history and significance of glass in science and thought (one of those ‘one day I’ll write a book about that’-interests).