Rethinking plasticity: Analysing the concept of "destructive plasticity" in the light of neuroscience definitions.

As a multilevel and multidisciplinary field, neuroscience is designed to interact with various branches of natural and applied sciences as well as with humanities and philosophy. The continental tradition in philosophy, particularly over the past 20 years, tended to establish strong connections with biology and neuroscience findings. This cross fertilization can however be impeded by conceptual intricacies, such as those surrounding the concept of plasticity.

Darwin and the White Shipwrecked Sailor: Beyond Blending Inheritance and the Jenkin Myth.

This paper revisits Fleeming Jenkin's anonymous review of Charles Darwin's Origin of Species, published in the North British Review in June 1867. This review is usually revered for its impact on Darwin's theory of descent with modification. Its classical interpretation states that Jenkin, a Professor of Engineering at the University of Edinburgh, made a compelling case against natural selection based on the fact of "blending inheritance" and the "swamping" of advantageous variations.

Bateman's Data: Inconsistent with "Bateman's Principles".

A.J. Bateman (1948) hypothesized that a metric of sexual selection is in sex differences of intrasexual variance in number of mates ( ).

Defining "Development".

Is it possible, and in the first place is it even desirable, to define what "development" means and to determine the scope of the field called "developmental biology"? Though these questions appeared crucial for the founders of "developmental biology" in the 1950s, there seems to be no consensus today about the need to address them. Here, in a combined biological, philosophical, and historical approach, we ask whether it is possible and useful to define biological development, and, if such a definition is indeed possible and useful, which definition(s) can be considered as the most satisfactory.

What Does It Mean to be Central? A Botanical Geography of Paris 1830-1848.

This paper focuses on the geography of the botanical community in Paris, under the July Monarchy (1830-1848). At that time, the Muséum d'Histoire naturelle (MHN) was at its institutional acme and, under the impulse of François Guizot, its budget was increasing dramatically. However, closer attention to manuscript sources (correspondence, travel diaries) reveals that the botanists of the time favoured other private institutions, located both on the Right and Left Banks of the Seine.

Benjamin Delessert's collections between travelers and Candolle's natural method (1803-1847).

During the first half of the nineteenth century, while Georges Cuvier ruled over natural history and the Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle (MHN) was at its institutional acme, a French banker and industrialist with a Swiss family background, Benjamin Delessert, was developing an important botanical museum in Paris. His private collection included both a rich botanical library and a massive herbarium: the close integration of these two dimensions, together with the magnanimity of Delessert's patronage, contributed to making this private institution a worthy rival to the powerful and state-funded MHN. Delessert's museum had the favor of both professional and amateur naturalists.

History without time: Buffon's natural history as a nonmathematical physique.

While "natural history" is practically synonymous with the name of Buffon, the term itself has been otherwise overlooked by historians of science. This essay attempts to address this omission by investigating the meanings of "physique," "natural philosophy," and "history," among other terms, with the purpose of understanding Buffon's actual objectives. It also shows that Buffon never claimed to be a Newtonian and should not be considered as such; the goal is to provide a historical analysis that resituates Buffon's thought within his own era.

Darwin teleologist? Design in The orchids.

Focusing on "The Orchids," this article aims at disentangling the concepts of teleology, design and natural theology. It refers to several contemporary critics of Darwin (Kölliker, Argyll, Royer, Candolle, Delpino) to challenge Huxley's interpretation that Darwin's system was "a deathblow" to teleology. "The Orchids" seems rather to be a "flank-movement" (Gray): it departs from the Romantic theories of transmutation and the "imaginary examples" of the Origin; it focuses on empirical data and on teleological structures.