scholarly journals Who's afraid of epigenetics? Habits, instincts, and Charles Darwin’s evolutionary theory

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariagrazia Portera ◽  
Mauro Mandrioli
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Epigenetic Inheritance ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Epigenetic Mechanisms ◽  
Intellectual Life ◽  
Entire Life ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Expression Of Genes

AbstractOur paper aims at bringing to the fore the crucial role that habits play in Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution by means of natural selection. We have organized the paper in two steps: first, we analyse value and functions of the concept of habit in Darwin's early works, notably in his Notebooks, and compare these views to his mature understanding of the concept in the Origin of Species and later works; second, we discuss Darwin’s ideas on habits in the light of today’s theories of epigenetic inheritance, which describe the way in which the functioning and expression of genes is modified by the environment, and how these modifications are transmitted over generations. We argue that Darwin’s lasting and multifaceted interest in the notion of habit, throughout his intellectual life, is both conceptually and methodologically relevant. From a conceptual point of view, intriguing similarities can be found between Darwin’s (early) conception of habit and contemporary views on epigenetic inheritance. From a methodological point of view, we suggest that Darwin’s plastic approach to habits, from his early writings up to the mature works, can provide today’s evolutionary scientists with a viable methodological model to address the challenging task of extending and expanding evolutionary theory, with particular reference to the integration of epigenetic mechanisms into existing models of evolutionary change. Over his entire life Darwin has modified and reassessed his views on habits as many times as required by evidence: his work on this notion may represent the paradigm of a habit of good scientific research methodology.

Darwinian Evolutionary Theory

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Ruse
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Selection ◽  
Natural Selection ◽  
Middle Class ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Homo Sapiens ◽  
Origin Of Species ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Descent Of Man

Charles Robert Darwin, the English naturalist, published On the Origin of Species in 1859 and the follow-up work The Descent of Man in 1871. In these works, he argued for his theory of evolution through natural selection, applying it to all organisms, living and dead, including our own species, Homo sapiens. Although controversial from the start, Darwin’s thinking was deeply embedded in the culture of his day, that of a middle-class Englishman. Evolution as such was an immediate success in scientific circles, but although the mechanism of selection had supporters in the scientific community (especially among those working with fast-breeding organisms), its real success was in the popular domain. Natural selection, and particularly the side mechanism of sexual selection, were known to all and popular themes in fiction and elsewhere.

scholarly journals Evolutionary biology today and the call for an extended synthesis

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 20160145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas J. Futuyma
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Epigenetic Inheritance ◽  
Reaction Norm ◽  
Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Extended Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Extended Synthesis ◽  
Proximate Causation

Evolutionary theory has been extended almost continually since the evolutionary synthesis (ES), but except for the much greater importance afforded genetic drift, the principal tenets of the ES have been strongly supported. Adaptations are attributable to the sorting of genetic variation by natural selection, which remains the only known cause of increase in fitness. Mutations are not adaptively directed, but as principal authors of the ES recognized, the material (structural) bases of biochemistry and development affect the variety of phenotypic variations that arise by mutation and recombination. Against this historical background, I analyse major propositions in the movement for an ‘extended evolutionary synthesis’. ‘Niche construction' is a new label for a wide variety of well-known phenomena, many of which have been extensively studied, but (as with every topic in evolutionary biology) some aspects may have been understudied. There is no reason to consider it a neglected ‘process’ of evolution. The proposition that phenotypic plasticity may engender new adaptive phenotypes that are later genetically assimilated or accommodated is theoretically plausible; it may be most likely when the new phenotype is not truly novel, but is instead a slight extension of a reaction norm already shaped by natural selection in similar environments. However, evolution in new environments often compensates for maladaptive plastic phenotypic responses. The union of population genetic theory with mechanistic understanding of developmental processes enables more complete understanding by joining ultimate and proximate causation; but the latter does not replace or invalidate the former. Newly discovered molecular phenomena have been easily accommodated in the past by elaborating orthodox evolutionary theory, and it appears that the same holds today for phenomena such as epigenetic inheritance. In several of these areas, empirical evidence is needed to evaluate enthusiastic speculation. Evolutionary theory will continue to be extended, but there is no sign that it requires emendation.

An Approach to the Theory of Natural Selection

Philosophy ◽  
1969 ◽  
Vol 44 (170) ◽  
pp. 271-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. D. Barker
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Darwinian Theory ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Positive Argument

In this paper I want to examine a view of the Darwinian theory of evolution which was put forward fairly recently by A. R. Manser. His approach is of interest not only in itself, but also because it may be expanded to raise some fundamental questions about the nature of the science of biology in general. I shall not consider these further implications here, but shall concentrate on an examination of his thesis in the context in which it is raised. My paper falls into two sections. In the first I shall state Manser's thesis and some of the arguments with which he supports it, and shall try to show how a series of objections raised by A. G. N. Flew and K. Connolly may be answered. In the second I shall offer on my own account a positive argument to provide a possible basis for his point of view, with the aim of indicating why the theory should be of the kind he suggests, and what form the study of evolution must take.

scholarly journals Non-genetic inheritance in evolutionary theory - the importance of plant studies

2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marta Robertson ◽  
Christina Richards
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Evolutionary Process ◽  
Epigenetic Inheritance ◽  
Causal Role ◽  
Epigenetic Variation ◽  
Epigenetic Mechanisms ◽  
Epigenetic Machinery ◽  
Evolutionary Studies ◽  
Modern Evolutionary Theory

AbstractEmerging evidence points to a causal role for epigenetic variation in evolution, but evolutionary biologists have been reluctant to incorporate epigenetics into modern evolutionary theory. Part of this ambivalence comes from the assumption that epigenetic inheritance is only relevant to the evolution of plants, which is perpetuated by a comparative lack of evolutionary studies in animals. However, although most of the evidence for epigenetic inheritance comes from plants, plants and animals share many homologous epigenetic mechanisms, and plants provide a more tractable system for investigating the causal role of epigenetic mechanisms underlying phenotypic variation and its relationship with fitness. The insights from studies of epigenetic inheritance in plants may be applicable across a broad range of taxa once we establish commonalities and differences in epigenetic machinery. In this paper we present evidence for a role of epigenetic mechanisms in the evolutionary process and discuss common objections to incorporating epigenetics into evolutionary theory. This review is not exhaustive, but is meant to demonstrate that epigenetic inheritance can be incorporated into current evolutionary theory without overhauling its foundations.

Evolution, theory of

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth A. Lloyd
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Life Forms ◽  
Genetic Mutation ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Selection Processes ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
In The Wild ◽  
Forms Of Life ◽  
The Public Sphere

The biological theory of evolution advances the view that the variety and forms of life on earth are the result of descent with modification from the earliest forms of life. Evolutionary theory does not attempt to explain the origin of life itself, that is, how the earliest forms of life came to exist, nor does it apply to the history of changes of the non-biological parts of the universe, which are also often described as ’evolutionary’. The mechanisms of natural selection, mutation and speciation are used in evolutionary theory to explain the relations and characteristics of all life forms. Modern evolutionary theory explains a wide range of natural phenomena, including the deep resemblances among organisms, the diversity of life forms, organisms’ possession of vestigial organs and the good fit or ’adaptedness’ between organisms and their environment. Often summarized as ’survival of the fittest’, the mechanism of natural selection actually includes several distinct processes. There must be variation in traits among the members of a population; these traits must be passed on from parents to offspring; and the different traits must confer differential advantage for reproducing successfully in that environment. Because evidence for each of these processes can be gathered independently of the evolutionary claim, natural selection scenarios are robustly testable. When a trait in a population has arisen because it was directly selected in this fashion, it is called an adaptation. Genetic mutation is the originating source of variation, and selection processes shape that variation into adaptive forms; random genetic drift and various levels and forms of selection dynamic developed by geneticists have been integrated into a general theory of evolutionary change that encompasses natural selection and genetic mutation as complementary processes. Detailed ecological studies are used to provide evidence for selection scenarios involving the evolution of species in the wild. Evolutionary theory is supported by an unusually wide range of scientific evidence, gaining its support from fields as diverse as geology, embryology, molecular genetics, palaeontology, climatology and functional morphology. Because of tensions between an evolutionary view of homo sapiens and some religious beliefs, evolutionary theory has remained controversial in the public sphere far longer than no less well-supported scientific theories from other sciences.

Darwin’s Impact on the Medical Sciences

2019 ◽  
pp. 171-186
Author(s):  
Fabio Zampieri
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Charles Darwin ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Medical Sciences ◽  
Darwinian Revolution ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Organic Evolution ◽  
Medical Issues ◽  
Nineteenth Century Medicine ◽  
The Impact

In early nineteenth century medicine, the concepts of organic evolution and natural selection emerged in different contexts, partly anticipating Darwinian revolution. In particular, the anatomical concept of disease favored the perception that men and animals were very similar from a morphological, physiological and pathological point of view, and that this could indicate a certain degree of kinship between them. The debate around human races and human pathological heredity saw first formulations of the principle of natural selection, even if without a full appraisal of its evolutionary implications. Charles Darwin took many inspirations from these medical theories. The impact of the theory of evolution formulated by him in 1859 was only apparently slight in medicine. It is even possible to support that evolutionary concepts contributed in a significant way to the most important medical issues, debates and new discipline in the period between 1880 and 1940.

Ethical Objections to Evolution in Contemporary Muslim Thought

2010 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 79-92
Author(s):  
David Jalajel
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Reproductive Success ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Ethical Behavior ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Islamic Theology ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Ethical Norms ◽  
Differential Reproductive Success ◽  
Survival Of The Fittest

Muslim creationists often argue that the theory of evolution is inherently unethical, claiming that concepts such as natural selection, survival of the fittest, and differential reproductive success promote behaviors like selfishness, violence, and sex- ual promiscuity. This article explores the distinctions made by classical Islamic theologians between God’s actions and human- ity’s actions and their potential to address ethical objections to evolution. The question is examined with reference to two theological traditions: the Ash`ari and the Salafi. The first one distinguishes between God’s creation of actions and humanity’s acquisition (kasab) of actions. According to this approach, ethical valuation is understood to be an attribute of human volitional action. The second approach, followed by Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, Ibn Abu al-`Izz, and others of the so-called Salafi tradition, distinguishes between God’s existential (kawni) will and legislative (shar`i) will. According to it, ethical valuation is restricted to the domain of what God legislates for His volitional creatures. Although these approaches differ in how they contextualize ethical behavior, both of them place ethical valuation strictly within the context of human volitional action. As a consequence, God’s actions in creation (and therefore what is observed in nature) can neither be taken as a pattern for determining ethical norms nor judged according to the ethical norms appropriate for human beings. The paper concludes that by making these distinctions, classical Islamic theology has the potential to effectively counter ethical objections to evolutionary theory.

Writing and Evolutionary Theory

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seán Hewitt
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
19Th Century ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Charles Darwin ◽  
Cultural Anthropology ◽  
Natural Theology ◽  
Historical Study ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Nature Study ◽  
The Impact

The development of evolutionary theory over the course of the 19th century was not confined to the theory of evolution by natural selection posited by Charles Darwin (b. 1809–d. 1882) and Alfred Russell Wallace (b. 1823–d. 1913). Encompassing the burgeoning science of geology, natural history, and biology and eventually being adapted into sociology, psychology, political theory, economics, and cultural anthropology, the theory of evolution quickly became both pervasive and divisive. Prior to Darwin’s intervention with the Origin of Species (1859), various theories of evolution were circulating, being accommodated within the field of natural theology or constituting a challenge to theories of intelligent design. Over the period, the interplay between literature and evolutionary theory was complex and pronounced: advances in science provoked new formal and thematic concerns for writers, and scientists used poetry and literary techniques to disseminate their arguments to wide readerships. During the period, the rise of natural historical study as a popular pursuit, and the Victorian emphasis on nature study as a moral, even religious, pursuit, meant that evolutionary ideas were adapted for various purposes and contested in both popular and specialist texts. Pre-Darwinian literature circulated evolutionary ideas mainly within the framework of natural theology (proving and discussing God’s existence through the study of Creation), but visions of harmony and beneficent design were challenged through the theory of natural selection, meaning that post-Darwinian literature more fully encompasses anthropological anxiety and the falling off of faith. Religious texts, and theological concerns, are thus central to the interplay between literature and science in the period. Toward the end of the century, the adaptation of Darwinism and evolutionary theory into various disciplines saw a proliferation of social Darwinism, branching off into eugenics, the impact of which would be felt most fully in the 20th century. This article focuses on writing and evolutionary theory in its immediate British and 19th-century contexts.

Subjectivity as a sentient perspective and the role of interoception

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena De Preester
Keyword(s):  
Crucial Role ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Basic Form ◽  
Bodily States ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Phenomenological Point

This chapter argues that the most basic form of subjectivity is different from and more fundamental than having a self, and forwards a hypothesis about the origin of subjectivity in terms of interoception. None of those topics are new, and a consensus concerning the homeostatic-interoceptive origin of subjectivity is rapidly growing in the domains of the neurosciences and psychology. This chapter critically explores that growing consensus, and it argues that the idea that the brain topographically represents bodily states is unfit for thinking about the coming about of subjectivity. In the first part, four inherent characteristics of subjectivity are discussed from a philosophical phenomenological point of view. The second part explores whether a model of subjectivity in which interoception maintains its crucial role is possible without relying on topographical representations of the in-depth body, and giving due to the inherent characteristics of subjectivity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document