SMT or TOFT? How the two main theories of carcinogenesis are made (artificially) incompatible.

摘要: The building of a global model carcinogenesis is one modern biology’s greatest challenges. traditional somatic mutation theory (SMT) now supplemented by new approach, called the Tissue Organization Field Theory (TOFT). According to TOFT, original source cancer loss tissue organization rather than genetic mutations. In this paper, we study argumentative strategy used advocates TOFT impose their view. particular, criticize claim incompatibility justify necessity definitively reject SMT. First, note that since it difficult build non-ambiguous experimental demonstration superiority its partisans add epistemological and metaphysical arguments debate. This allows them defend paradigm shift, with superseding To do so, they introduce notion incompatibility, which actually use as Kuhnian incommensurability. so-called between two theories cancer, move debate ground assimilating controversy fundamental opposition reductionism organicism. We show here specious, because does not demonstrate clearly an organicist theory. Since shares SMT vocabulary, ontology methodology, appears based on plan fully justified in present state conclude more cogent argue are compatible, both biologically metaphysically. propose consider describe distinct compatible causal pathways carcinogenesis. view coherent existence integrative approaches, suggests have higher epistemic value taken separately.