Introduction

1988 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith Stewart Thomson
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Phenotypic Variation ◽  
Charles Darwin ◽  
Dynamic Properties ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Genetic Level ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Scientific Subject ◽  
Neutral Mutations ◽  
As If

All of science is fundamentally about cause. It is about explanations of the reasons things are the way they are and the mechanisms that produce them. It is now commonplace to observe that Charles Darwin brought evolution and all of organismal biology into line as a truly scientific subject by discussing evolutionary phenomena in terms of cause, and thus in the same testable, quantifiable frame of reference that applies to other science. Darwin's theory of natural selection as a causal agency for evolutionary change was only the beginning of our problems, not the end. For more than a hundred years, we have sought to find all the layers and intersecting lines of causality that produce natural selection as well as to discover other mechanisms for change that are nonselective in nature—genetic drift or neutral mutations, for example. Natural selection is basically a mechanism that involves two components: the introduction of variants into a system and the subsequent sorting of these variants (Vrba and Eldredge, 1984) so that, over generations, there is a differential contribution of these variants to higher levels such as populations and species. Up to the present time, most attention of evolutionists has concentrated upon two aspects of the problem: the genetic basis of phenotypic variation and the dynamic properties of populations containing the individual variants. The present book is concerned with the mechanisms affecting the expression of variation among individual phenotypes. It has been a surprisingly neglected subject. The New Synthetic theory of evolution and its later modifications have largely been pursued as if the intrinsic mechanisms by which variation is caused among individual organismal phenotypes are less important to the processes of evolution than the extrinsic mechanisms of sorting. If only by default, variation introduced at the level of the individual phenotypes is commonly treated as if it were a simple mapping of variation at the genetic level, or at least were only a very simple function of that. It has seemed not only necessary but sufficient to study genetics in order to understand phenotypic variation.

‘Short-Spanned Living Creatures’: Evolutionary Perspectives in Rhoda Broughton’s Not Wisely, but Too Well (1867)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Aaron Green
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Simple Structure ◽  
Charles Darwin ◽  
Origin Of Species ◽  
Charles Lyell ◽  
Crystal Palace ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Evolutionary Perspectives

Abstract In Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man (1863), Charles Lyell appraised the distinct contribution made by his protégé, Charles Darwin (On the Origin of Species (1859)), to evolutionary theory: ‘Progression … is not a necessary accompaniment of variation and natural selection [… Darwin’s theory accounts] equally well for what is called degradation, or a retrogressive movement towards a simple structure’. In Rhoda Broughton’s first novel, Not Wisely, but Too Well (1867), written contemporaneously with Lyell’s book, the Crystal Palace at Sydenham prompts precisely this sort of Darwinian ambivalence to progress; but whether British civilization ‘advance[s] or retreat[s]’, her narrator adds that this prophesized state ‘will not be in our days’ – its realization exceeds the single lifespan. This article argues that Not Wisely, but Too Well is attentive to the irreconcilability of Darwinism to the Victorian ‘idea of progress’: Broughton’s novel, distinctly from its peers, raises the retrogressive and nihilistic potentials of Darwin’s theory and purposes them to reflect on the status of the individual in mid-century Britain.

2. Evolution and natural selection

2019 ◽  
pp. 9-26
Author(s):  
Samir Okasha
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Charles Darwin ◽  
Natural World ◽  
Early 20Th Century ◽  
Philosophical Argument ◽  
Modern Biology ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Philosophical Significance ◽  
Argument From Design ◽  
Evolution By Natural Selection

In 1859 Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species, in which he set out his theory of evolution. The book marked a turning point in our understanding of the natural world and revolutionized biology. ‘Evolution and natural selection’ outlines the theory of evolution by natural selection, explaining its unique status in biology and its philosophical significance. It considers how Darwin’s theory undermined the ‘argument from design’, a traditional philosophical argument for the existence of God; how the integration of Darwin’s theory with genetics, in the early 20th century, gave rise to neo-Darwinism; and why, despite evolutionary theory being a mainstay of modern biology, in society at large there is a marked reluctance to believe in evolution.

Sociobiology

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Rosenberg
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Social Institutions ◽  
Human Behaviour ◽  
Behavioural Science ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Darwinian Theory ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Mendelian Genetics ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Mental Testing

Following Darwin, biologists and social scientists have periodically been drawn to the theory of natural selection as the source of explanatory insights about human behaviour and social institutions. The combination of Mendelian genetics and Darwinian theory, which did so much to substantiate the theory of evolution in the life sciences, however, has made recurrent adoption of a biological approach to the social sciences controversial. Excesses and errors in social Darwinism, eugenics and mental testing have repeatedly exposed evolutionary approaches in the human sciences to criticism. Sociobiology is the version of Darwinism in social and behavioural science that became prominent in the last quarter of the twentieth century. Philosophical problems of sociobiology include challenges to the explanatory relevance of Darwinian theory for human behaviour and social institutions, controversies about whether natural selection operates at levels of organization above or below the individual, questions about the meaning of the nature–nurture distinction, and disputes about Darwinism’s implications for moral philosophy.

Darwinism

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Ruse
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Land Tenure ◽  
Charles Darwin ◽  
General Term ◽  
Evolutionary Change ◽  
Social Darwinism ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Mendelian Genetics ◽  
Thomas Henry Huxley ◽  
Foundational Work

The modern usage of the term Darwinism dates from the publication of On the Origin of Species, by Charles Darwin, in which he argued for evolution through natural selection. Very soon after the appearance of the Origin (in 1859), Darwin’s great supporter Thomas Henry Huxley introduced the term Darwinism. The term—together with the related terms Darwinian and Darwinist—took root. The codiscoverer of natural selection, Alfred Russel Wallace, used the term as the title of a book expounding evolution: Darwinism: An Exposition of the Theory of Natural Selection, with Some of Its Applications. Note that there seems to be a fuzziness about the term. Some identify Darwinism with evolution through natural selection. Others suggest that the essence of Darwinism is not selection per se but change or variation. Late in the 19th century, George Romanes coined the term neo-Darwinism to cover those for whom natural selection is basically the only significant cause of change. In 1930 Ronald A. Fisher, in his Genetical Theory of Natural Selection, argued that the newly developed theory of Mendelian genetics offered the required foundation for a perspective that made natural selection the central force of evolutionary change. Although the British were happy to call the Darwin-Mendel synthesis neo-Darwinism, in America the synthesis was known as the synthetic theory of evolution. This reflects that in the New World it was Sewall Wright who did the foundational work in bringing Mendelian genetics into the evolutionary picture and that he never thought of natural selection as being the force that Fisher took it to be. For Wright and his followers, especially Theodosius Dobzhansky, genetic drift was always a major component of the evolutionary picture, and as Fisher pointed out nonstop, this is about as non-Darwinian a notion as it is possible to have. By 1959 professional evolutionists (on both sides of the Atlantic) agreed that Darwin had been right about natural selection: it is the major cause of evolutionary change. Neo-Darwinism fell into disuse, as everyone now used the term Darwinism for evolution through natural selection. Mention should also be made of so-called social Darwinism, the application of Darwinism to persons and groups within society. The earliest use apparently was during Darwin’s own lifetime, by a historian discussing land tenure in Ireland. However, it was not a popular or general term, coming into widespread use only in the 1940s, with the publication of the American historian Richard Hofstadter’s book Social Darwinism in American Thought.

Joseph Dalton Hooker, F. R. S. (1817-1911)

1959 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-120
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Major Part ◽  
Charles Darwin ◽  
Plant Taxonomy ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
General Acceptance ◽  
Long Period ◽  
Varying Length ◽  
Joseph Dalton Hooker ◽  
Living Material

Joseph Dalton Hooker was eight years the junior of Charles Darwin (1809-82) and lived twenty-nine years after Darwin’s death. He was, for a long period, the personal friend of Darwin and the frank critic of many of Darwin’s researches and of the botanical aspects of Darwinian theories. Hooker was a botanist and, since he had an extensive first-hand experience of many branches of botany, above all of plant taxonomy and phytogeography, it was naturally the botanical aspects of evolutionary problems which both interested him and concerning which he was best able to help Darwin. Such help was gratefully and fully acknowledged by Darwin, as is shown by published correspondence. Numerous letters passed between Darwin and Hooker and the latter visited his friend at Down and stayed there for periods of varying length. A considerable amount of living material was obviously supplied from Kew for the later botanical experiments Darwin carried out at Down. The assistance given by Hooker in the accumulation of facts and in criticism of theories preparatory to the publication of the Origin of species and later works of Darwin, his presenting (with Lyell) and reading Darwin’s communication to the Linnean Society of London on 1 July 1858 introducing the theory of natural selection, and his influence in gaining the speedy general acceptance of the theory of evolution are well known and it is not necessary to consider them here in much detail. It is proposed, instead, to outline very briefly the salient facts in the life of J.D. Hooker and then to devote the major part of this essay to a consideration of the development of his views on the problems of species, phytogeography, and evolution. In part at least, this means considering the influence of Darwin on Hooker but, from a wider viewpoint, it is possible to form some conception of the clarifying and unifying effects of the acceptance of the general theory of evolution on biological thought.

scholarly journals Darwin's Use of Intellectual Disability in The Descent of Man

2008 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven A. Gelb
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Disability ◽  
Natural Selection ◽  
Intellectual Disabilities ◽  
Human Evolution ◽  
Mental State ◽  
Charles Darwin ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Descent Of Man

When Charles Darwin turned his attention to writing about human descent in 1871 he attempted to narrow the fossil gap between human beings and higher primates by presenting persons with intellectual disabilities — "idiots" in the language of the day — as evidence in support of the theory of evolution. This paper explores the four ways that Darwin used persons with intellectual disabilities in The Descent of Man: 1) as intermediate rung on the evolutionary ladder connecting humans and primates; 2) as exemplars of the inevitable waste and loss produced by natural selection acting upon variability; 3) as the floor of a scale representing the "lowest", most unfit variety of any species when individuals were rank ordered by intelligence; and 4) as atavistic reversions to extinct forms whose study would reveal the characteristics of earlier stages of human evolution. Darwin's strategic use of intellectual disability is brought to bear on the controversy regarding the mental state of Darwin's last child.

Charles Darwin and the Falkland Islands

Polar Record ◽  
1985 ◽  
Vol 22 (139) ◽  
pp. 413-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Grove
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
South America ◽  
Charles Darwin ◽  
Galapagos Islands ◽  
Falkland Islands ◽  
Galápagos Islands ◽  
Southern South America ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Evolution By Natural Selection ◽  
Endemic Flora

AbstractCharles Darwin's notes, diary entries and letters covering visits to southern South America and the Falkland Islands in 1833 and 1834 throw light on the revolutionary events of the time. His notes also contain the first indication of an evolutionary concept, suggested by the endemic flora and fauna of the Falklands, which guided his later observations on the Galapagos Islands and lead ultimately to his theory of evolution by natural selection.

scholarly journals Evolution of adaptive phenotypic variation patterns by direct selection for evolvability

2010 ◽  
Vol 278 (1713) ◽  
pp. 1903-1912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mihaela Pavlicev ◽  
James M. Cheverud ◽  
Günter P. Wagner
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Phenotypic Variation ◽  
Genetic Model ◽  
Gene Interaction ◽  
Directional Selection ◽  
Direct Selection ◽  
Phenotypic Traits ◽  
Heritable Variation ◽  
Darwinian Theory ◽  
Theory Of Evolution

A basic assumption of the Darwinian theory of evolution is that heritable variation arises randomly. In this context, randomness means that mutations arise irrespective of the current adaptive needs imposed by the environment. It is broadly accepted, however, that phenotypic variation is not uniformly distributed among phenotypic traits, some traits tend to covary, while others vary independently, and again others barely vary at all. Furthermore, it is well established that patterns of trait variation differ among species. Specifically, traits that serve different functions tend to be less correlated, as for instance forelimbs and hind limbs in bats and humans, compared with the limbs of quadrupedal mammals. Recently, a novel class of genetic elements has been identified in mouse gene-mapping studies that modify correlations among quantitative traits. These loci are called relationship loci, or relationship Quantitative Trait Loci (rQTL), and affect trait correlations by changing the expression of the existing genetic variation through gene interaction. Here, we present a population genetic model of how natural selection acts on rQTL. Contrary to the usual neo-Darwinian theory, in this model, new heritable phenotypic variation is produced along the selected dimension in response to directional selection. The results predict that selection on rQTL leads to higher correlations among traits that are simultaneously under directional selection. On the other hand, traits that are not simultaneously under directional selection are predicted to evolve lower correlations. These results and the previously demonstrated existence of rQTL variation, show a mechanism by which natural selection can directly enhance the evolvability of complex organisms along lines of adaptive change.

scholarly journals Christianity and Darwinism: The Journey Is More Important Than the Destination

Religions ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 124
Author(s):  
Michael Ruse
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Charles Darwin ◽  
Natural Theology ◽  
Theory Of Evolution

Does God exist? If he does, what is the evidence for this? Can one arrive at God through reason (natural theology), or is it faith or nothing (revealed theology)? I write of my lifetime of wrestling with this question. Raised a Quaker, I lost my faith at the age of 20. As an academic, I became an expert on Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution through natural selection. How can I make sense of—and how can I reconcile—these two hugely important things in my life? At the age of 80, I find myself a long-standing agnostic. This is not, as Francis Collins claims, a “cop out.” Showing my debt to my Quaker heritage, I am theologically apophatic. I can say only what I do not know. I find this quite-out-of-character modesty hugely exciting. It gives my life great meaning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document