Beyond darwinism's eclipse: Functional evolution, biochemical recapitulation and Spencerian emergence in the 1920s and 1930s [Book Review]
Journal for General Philosophy of Science 41 (1):173 - 194 (2010)
|Abstract||During the 1920s and 1930s, many biologists questioned the viability of Darwin’s theory as a mechanism of evolutionary change. In the early 1940s, and only after a number of alternatives were suggested, Darwinists succeeded to establish natural selection and gene mutation as the main evolutionary mechanisms. While that move, today known as the neo-Darwinian synthesis, is taken as signalling a triumph of evolutionary theory, certain critical problems in evolution—in particular the evolution of animal function—could not be addressed with this approach. Here I demonstrate this through reconstruction of the evolutionary theory of Joseph Needham (1900–1995), who pioneered the biochemical study of evolution and development. In order to address such problems, Needham employed Herbert Spencer’s principles of emergence and Ernst Haeckel’s theory of recapitulation. While Needham did not reject Darwinian theory, Spencerian and Haeckelian frameworks happened to better fit his findings and their evolutionary relevance. He believed selectionist and genetic approaches to be important but far from sufficient for explaining how evolutionary transformations occur|
|Keywords||Comparative biochemistry Physiological evolution Recapitulation Needham Haeckel Spencer Lucas|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Massimo Pigliucci (2009). An Extended Synthesis for Evolutionary Biology. Annals of the New York Academy of Science 1168:218-228.
Arlin Stoltzfus (2006). Mutationism and the Dual Causation of Evolutionary Change. Evolution and Development 8 (3):304-317.
Telmo Pievani (2003). Rhapsodic Evolution: Essay on Exaptation and Evolutionary Pluralism. World Futures 59 (2):63 – 81.
David Young (2007). The Discovery of Evolution. Cambridge University Press, in Association with Natural History Museum, London.
Massimo Pigliucci (2007). Do We Need an Extended Evolutionary Synthesis? Evolution 61 (12):2743-2749.
Sahotra Sarkar (2004). Evolutionary Theory in the 1920s: The Nature of the "Synthesis". Philosophy of Science 71 (5):1215-1226.
Sahotra Sarkar (2004). Evolutionary Theory in the 1920s: The Nature of the “Synthesis”. Philosophy of Science 71 (5):1215-1226.
Added to index2010-06-30
Total downloads7 ( #142,281 of 722,826 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,826 )
How can I increase my downloads?