Articles

Philosophy of Plant Morphology

Herbsttagung «Evolving Morphology»
Rolf Sattler
Elemente der Naturwissenschaft 108, 2018, S. 55-79 | DOI: 10.18756/edn.108.55
Article | Sprache: English | €6.00
Artikelreferenz exportieren

Zusammenfassung:

I demonstrate how morphological research and our view of plant form is influenced by philosophical assumptions that are associated with worldviews and how empirical research may affect these assumptions and worldviews. I examine the following nine worldviews: essentialism, including phenomenology, mechanism, the fuzzy worldview (the continuum worldview), the dynamic worldview (also referred to as contextualism and process philosophy), holism or the holistic worldview (also called organicism), perspectivism (including complementarity), the generatingsubstance worldview, animism, and mysticism. All of these worldviews complement one another. However, essentialism and mechanism are more limited and the generating-substance worldview seems not tenable in terms of a material substance. All the remaining worldviews may be subsumed under a holodynamic worldview in the most comprehensive sense according to which plants and their morphology are integrated with the environment and the universe. Goethe embraced all of these nine worldviews. Characterizing him only as a phenomenologist and his method only or mainly as intuitive judgement (anschauende Urteilskraft), as it has been done so often, appears rather incomplete, one-sided, misleading, and a disservice to the “all-embracing Goethe” (Cusset 1982) who could recognize very different perspectives and could even go beyond them toward the mysterious ground of everything.

Referenzen
  • Arber, A. (1946): Goethe’s Botany. Chronica Botanica 10, pp. 63-126.
  • Arber, A. (1950): The Natural Philosophy of Plant Form. Cambridge.
  • Arber, A. (1957): The Manifold and the One. London. Wheaton, I. L.1967.
  • Bockemühl, J. (1966): Bildebewegungen im Laubblattbereich höherer Pflanzen. Elemente d. N. 4, pp. 7-23. New edition in: Schad, W. (1982): Goetheanistische Naturwissenschaft 2, pp. 17-35. Stuttgart.
  • Bohm, D. (1981): Wholeness and the Implicate Order. London.
  • Bohm, D., Hiley, B. J. (1993): The Undivided Universe: An Ontological Interpretation of Quantum Theory. London.
  • Bortoft, H. (1996): The Wholeness of Nature. Goethe’s Way toward a Science of Conscious Participation in Nature. Hudson NY.
  • Bortoft, H. (2012): Taking Appearances Seriously. The Dynamical Way of Seeing in Goethe and European Thought. Edinburgh.
  • Brady, R. H. (1987): Form and cause in Goethe’s morphology. In Amrine et al. (eds.): Goethe and the Sciences: A Reappraisal. Boston, pp. 257-300.
  • Bünning, E. (1977): Fifty years of research in the wake of Wilhelm Pfeffer. Annual Reviews of Plant Physiology 28, pp. 1-22.
  • Champagnat, M., Blatteron, S. (1966): Ontogénie des organs axillaires du cresson (Nasturtium officinale R. Br.). Revue Générale de Botanique 73, pp. 85-102.
  • Classen-Bockhoff, R. (2005): Aspekte, Typifikationsverfahren und Aussagen der Planzenmorphologie. In: Harlan, V. (ed.): Wert und Grenzen des Typus in der botanischen Morphologie. Nümbrecht, pp. 31-52.
  • Classen-Bockhoff, R. (2016): The shoot concept of the flower: Still up to date? Flora 221, pp. 46-53.
  • Cooney-Sovetts, C., Sattler, R. (1987): Phylloclade development in the Asparagaceae: an example of homoeosis. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 94, pp. 327-371.
  • Craw, R., Heads, M. (1988): Reading Croizat. On the edge of biology. Rivista di Biologia - Biology Forum 81(4), pp. 499-532.
  • Croizat, L. (1964): Space, Time, Form: The Biological Synthesis. Published by the author. Caracas.
  • Cusset, G. (1982): The conceptual bases of plant morphology. In: Sattler, R. (ed.): Axioms and Principles of Plant Construction. The Hague (first published in Acta Biotheoretica, Vol. 31A).
  • Cusset, G. (1994): A simple classification of the complex parts of vascular plants. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 114, pp. 229- 242.
  • Dupré, J., Nicholson, D. J. (2018): Towards a processual philosophy of bio logy. In: Nicholson, D.J., Dupré, J. (eds.): Everything Flows: Towards a Processual Philosophy of Biology. Oxford.
  • Eckardt, N.A., Baum, D. (2010): The Podostemad puzzle: The evolution of unusual morphology in the Podostemaceae. The Plant Cell 22, p. 2104.
  • Froebe, H. A. (1971): Die wissenschaftstheoretische Stellung der Typologie. Berichte der deutschen botanischen Gesellschaft 84, pp. 119-129.
  • Goethe, J. W. (1790): Versuch die Metamorphose der Pflanzen zu erklären. Gotha.
  • Goethe, J. W. (1817): Anschauende Urteilskraft, published 1820, translated as Intuitive Judgement by Mueller 1989, p. 233.
  • Goethe, J. W. (1818): Bedenken und Ergebung, published 1820, translated as Indecision and Surrender by Mueller 1989, p. 219.
  • Goethe, J. W. (1817-1824): Zur Naturwissenschaft überhaupt, besonders zur Morphologie: Erfahrung, Betrachtung, Folgerung, durch Lebens ereignisse verbunden. Band 1: Heft 1 (1817), Heft 2 und 3 (1820), Heft 4 (1822), Band 2: Heft 1 (1823), Heft 2 (1824). Stuttgart, Tübingen.
  • Goethe, J. W. (1828): Erläuterung zu dem aphoristischen Aufsaz “Die Na tur.” Goethe’s Brief an den Kanzler F.T.A.H. von Müller (translation by Mueller 1989, pp. 244-245).
  • Goethe, J. W. (1831): Wirkung meiner Schrift. Reproduced in Troll, W. (1926): Goethes morphologische Schriften. Jena.
  • Goethe, J. W. (1998): Maxims and Reflections. London.
  • Gray, W. (1994): Goethe’s The Metamorphosis of Plants: the issue of science and poetry. Archives of Natural History 21, pp. 379-391.
  • Greene, D. (2009): Endless Energy. A Guide to Energy Health. Maui HI.
  • Hagemann, W. (2005): Die typologische Methode: ein Schlüssel zu einer organismischen Botanik. In: Harlan, V. (ed.): Wert und Grenzen des Typus in der botanischen Morphologie. Nümbrecht, pp. 81-126.
  • Hawkins, J. A. (2002): Evolutionary developmental biology: impact on systematic theory and practice. In: Cronk, Q.C.B. et al. (eds.): Devel opmental Genetics and Plant Evolution. London, pp. 32-51. Heads, M. (in preparation): The origin of flowers.
  • Hirayama, Y. et al. (2007): Expression patterns of class 1 KNOX and YABBY genes in Ruscus aculeatus (Asparagaceae) with implications for phylloclade homology. Development Genes and Evolution 217, pp. 363-372. Epub.
  • Hoggan, J. (2016): I’m Right and you’re an Idiot. The Toxic State of Public Discourse and how to Clean it up. Gabriola Island BC.
  • Holdrege, C. (2014): Goethe and the evolution of science. In: Context 31, pp. 10-23.
  • Howard, R. A. (1974): The stem-node-leaf continuum of the Dicotyledonae. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum 55, pp. 125-181.
  • Jeune, B., Barabé, D., Lacroix, C. (2006): Classical and dynamic morpholo gy: toward a synthesis through the space of forms. Acta Biotheoretica 54, pp. 277-293.
  • Kirchoff, B. K. (2002): Aspects of a Goethean science: complexity and holism in science and art. In: Rowland, H. (ed.): Goethe, Chaos and Complexity. Amsterdam, pp. 79-89, 189-194.
  • Korzybski, A. (1994): Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristo telian Systems and General Semantics. 5th edition. Institute of General Semantics. esgs.free.fr/uk/art/sands.htm
  • Kosko, B. (1993): Fuzzy Thinking. The New Science of Fuzzy Logic. New York.
  • Lacroix, C. et al (2003): Shoot and compound leaf comparisons in eudicot. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 143, pp. 219-230.
  • Leins, P., Erbar, C. (2010): Flower and Fruit. Stuttgart.
  • Minelli, A. (2016): Tracing homologies in an ever-changing world. Rivista di estetica 62, pp. 40-55. Doi:10.4000/estetica.1174
  • Minelli, A. (2018): Plant Evolutionary Biology. The Evolvability of the Phenotype. New York.
  • Mueller, B. (translator (1989): Goethe’s Botanical Writings. Woodbridge CT.
  • Olwen, S. (2017): On reading energy and auras. www.thegoodspellcook book.com/blog/on-energy-reading-auras/
  • Portmann, A. (1956): Biologie und Geist. Zürich.
  • Portmann, A. (1965): Die Tiergestalt. Basel.
  • Potonié, H. (1912): Grundlinien der Pflanzenmorphologie im Lichte der Palaeontologie. Jena.
  • Rankin, A. (2010): Many-Sided Wisdom. Ropley, Hants, U.K.
  • Richter, R. (2012): Anschauung bei Kant und Goethe. Elemente d. N. 97, pp. 29-52.
  • Rutishauser, R. (2005): Der Bauplan abweichend gebauter Blütenpflanzen (Misfits) - Kontinuummodell ergänzt klassische Pflanzenmorphologie. In: Wert und Grenzen des Typus in der botanischen Morphologie. Nümbrecht, pp. 127-148.
  • Rutishauser, R. (2016): Evolution of unusual morphologies in Lentibula riaceae (bladderworts and allies) and Podostemaceae (river-weeds): a pictorial report on the interphase of developmental biology and morphological diversification. Annals of Botany 117, pp. 811-832. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcv172
  • Rutishauser, R., Sattler, R. (1985): Complementarity and heuristic value of contrasting models in structural botany. I. General considerations. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik 107, pp. 415-455.
  • Rutishauser, R., Sattler, R. (1997): Expression of shoot processes in leaf development of Polemonium caeruleum. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik 119, pp. 563-582.
  • Rutishauser, R., Isler, R. (2001): Developmentl genetics and morphological evolution of flowering plants, especially bladderworts (Utricularia): Fuzzy Arberian Morpholgy complements Classical Morphology. Annals of Botany 88, pp. 1173-1201. Rut_Isl_AnnBot_2001.pdf
  • Sattler, R. (1986): Biophilosophy. Analytic and Holistic Perspectives. New York.
  • Sattler, R. (1987): A dynamic multidimensional approach to floral morpho logy. In: Leins, P. et al. (eds.): Aspects of Floral Development. Berlin, Stuttgart, pp. 1-6.
  • Sattler, R. (1990): Toward a more dynamic plant morphology. Acta Biothe oretica 38, pp. 303-315. philpapers.org/rec/SATTAM
  • Sattler, R. (1993): Why do we need a more dynamic study of morphoge nesis? In: Barabé, D., Brunet, R. (eds.): Morphogenèse et Dynamique. Orbis, pp. 139-152.
  • Sattler, R. (1994): Homology, homeosis and process morphology in plants. In: Hall, B.K. (ed.): Homology: The Hierarchical Basis of Comparative Biology. New York.
  • Sattler, R. (1996): Classical morphology and continuum morphology: opposition and continuum. Annals of Botany 78, pp. 577-581. aob.oxfordjournals.org/content/78/5/577.full.pdf
  • Sattler, R. (1998): On the origin of symmetry, branching and phyllotaxis in land plants. In: Jean, R.V., Barabé, D. (eds.): Symmetry in Plants. Singapore, pp. 775-793.
  • Sattler, R. (2010): Healing Thinking and Being. www.beyondwilber.ca/ books/healing/healing_thinking_and_being.html
  • Sattler, R. (2016): Wholeness, Fragmentation, and the Unnamable: Holism, Materialism, and Mysticism - A Mandala. www.beyondwilber.ca/ books/mandala/mandala_of_life_and_living.html
  • Sattler, R. (2017): Organogenesis of flowers. The diversity, complexity and dynamics of floral development. www.beyondwilber.ca/about/flower/ floral-development.html Sattler, R. (Plant Morphology): www.beyondWilber.ca/about/plantmor phology/plant_morphology.html Sattler, R. (Body, Speech, and Mind): www.beyondwilber.ca/body-speech mind.html Sattler, R. (Present Interests): www.beyondWilber.ca/about/presinters/ rolf_sattler_present_interests.html
  • Sattler, R., Jeune, B. (1992): Multivariate analysis confirms the continuum view of plant form. Annals of Botany 69, pp. 249-262. academic. oup.com/aob/article-abstract/69/3/249/347624/Multivariate-Analysis Confirms-the-Continuum-View?redirectedFrom=fulltext
  • Schad, W. (2005): Die Evolution von Makrophyten in der Paläobotanik. In: Wert und Grenzen des Typus in der botanischen Morphologie. Nümbrecht, pp. 201-216.
  • Schilperoord, P. (2011): Metamorphosen im Pflanzenreich. Stuttgart.
  • Schüepp, O. (1933): Die Arbeiten Nägelis zur Entwicklungsgeschichte der Blätter. Verhandlungen der Naturforschenden Gesellschaft in Basel 44 (1), pp. 223-274.
  • Schultz, C. H. (1843): Die Anaphytose oder Verjüngung der Pflanzen. Berlin.
  • Schultz-Schultzenstein, C. H. (1867): De la différence qui existe entre la théorie de l’anaphytose des plantes et la théorie de la métamorphose. Actes du Congrès International de Botanique Paris. pp. 100-117.
  • Steiner, R. (1884): Einleitung zu Goethes Naturwissenschaftlichen Schriften. 1. Auflage, Dornach 1926. 2. Auflage, Stuttgart 1962, GA 1.
  • Steiner, R. (1906): Die okkulte Grundlage in Goethes Schaffen. Dornach, GA 35. English edition (2004): The spiritual-scientific basis of Goethe’s work. wn.rsarchive.org/Articles/SSBoGW_index.html
  • Steiner, R. (1910a): Die Geheimwissenschaft im Umriss. 4. Auflage, Dornach 2010, GA 13. Translated as Occult Science - An Outline, New York 1950.
  • Steiner, R. (1910b): Der Geist im Pflanzenreich. 1. Auflage, Dornach 1959, GA 60. Translated as The Spirit in the Realm of Plants. wn.rsarchive. org/Lectures/19101208p01.html
  • Stockdale, S. (o. J.): The structural differential and the process of abstraction. www.thisisnotthat.com/structural-differential/
  • Tanahashi, K. (2014): The Heart Sutra. Boston.
  • Tauber, A. I. (2010): Reframing developmental biology and building evolu tionary theory’s new synthesis. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 53, pp. 257-270.
  • Tiller, W. A. (2007): Psychoenergetic Science: A Second Copernican-Scale Revolution. Walnut Creek CA.
  • Troll, W. (1926): Goethes morphologische Schriften. Jena.
  • Whitehead, A. N. (1929): Process and Reality. Cambridge.
  • Whorf, B. L. (2012): Language, Thought, and Reality. Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. 2nd edition. In: Carroll, J.B. et al. (eds.): Cam bridge MA.
  • Wilber, K. (2006): Integral Spirituality. Boston.
  • Wilber, K. (2007): The Integral Vision. Boston.
  • Woodger, J. H. (1929): Biological Principles. The original issue reissued 1967 with a new introduction. New York.
  • Woolf, V. V. (1990): Holodynamics. New York.
  • Wyder, M. (ed. (1999): Bis an die Sterne weit? Goethe und die Naturwis senschaften. Frankfurt.
  • Young, S. (2016): The Scienc of Enlightenment. Boulder CO.
  • Zimmermann, W. (1930): Die Phylogenie der Pflanzen. 2nd edition 1959. Stuttgart.