| Revue: | Ludus vitalis |
| Base de datos: | CLASE |
| Número de sistema: | 000406318 |
| ISSN: | 1133-5165 |
| Autores: | Dressino, Vicente1 Lamas, Susana Gisela1 |
| Instituciones: | 1Universidad Nacional de La Plata, La Plata, Buenos Aires. Argentina |
| Año: | 2014 |
| Volumen: | 22 |
| Número: | 41 |
| Paginación: | 117-128 |
| País: | México |
| Idioma: | Inglés |
| Tipo de documento: | Artículo |
| Enfoque: | Analítico |
| Resumen en inglés | In this paper, we examine a case of scientific controversy over the envolving role of the paranasal sinuses, comparing Neanderthals and humans by analyzing two rival hypotheses. The first hypothesis states that the paranasal sinuses do not represent an adaptation to extreme cold, while the second claims the contrary. The two articles partially use the same database and employ identical methodoogies and evolutionary theoretical assumptions. This example is interesting because, in terms of Nudle's concepts of controversial and non-controversial spaces, the problem lies in the latter, i.e., the biases of the two articles and their mistakes. Our paper highlights the misunderstandings that can arise when an attempt is made to analyze a complex structure from an evolutionary perspective using two-dimensional analytucal techniques, that is to say, explaining a trait in isolation and , consequently, losing an integrated approach to the organism and its multiple interactions with the environment |
| Disciplinas: | Biología, Filosofía |
| Palabras clave: | Evolución y filogenia, Filosofía de la ciencia, Filosofía de la biología, Controversia, Homo neanderthalensis, Humanos, Adaptación |
| Solicitud del documento | |
