Evolutionary Biology – New Perspectives on Its Development – serie

This book offers a thorough reanalysis of Charles Darwin's Origin of Species, which for many people represents the work that alone gave rise to evolutionism. Of course, scholars today know better than that. Yet, few resist the temptation of turning to the Origin in order to support it or reject it in light of their own work. Apparently, Darwin fills the mythical role of a founding figure that must either be invoked or repudiated. The book is an invitation to move beyond what is currently expected of Darwin's magnum opus. Once the rhetorical varnish of Darwin's discourses is removed, one discovers a work of remarkably indecisive conclusions. The book comprises two main theses:(1) The Origin of Species never remotely achieved the theoretical unity to which it is often credited. Rather, Darwin was overwhelmed by a host of phenomena that could not fit into his narrow conceptual framework.(2) In the Origin of Species, Darwin failed at completing the full conversion to evolutionism. Carrying many ill-designed intellectual tools of the 17th and 18th centuries, Darwin merely promoted a special brand of evolutionism, one that prevented him from taking the decisive steps toward an open and modern evolutionism.It makes an interesting read for biologists, historians and philosophers alike.

This book offers a thorough reanalysis of Charles Darwin's Origin of Species, which for many people represents the work that alone gave rise to evolutionism.

This book presents a unified evolutionary framework based on three sets of metaphors that will help to consolidate discussions on evolutionary transitions. Evolution is the unifying principle of life, making identifying ways to apply evolutionary principles to tackle existence-threatening crises such as climate change crucial.

This book presents a unified evolutionary framework based on three sets of metaphors that will help to consolidate discussions on evolutionary transitions. Evolution is the unifying principle of life, making identifying ways to apply evolutionary principles to tackle existence-threatening crises such as climate change crucial.

This book contests the general view that natural selection constitutes the explanatory core of evolutionary biology. It invites the reader to consider an alternative view which favors a more complete and multidimensional interpretation.It is common to present the 1930-1960 period as characterized by the rise of the Modern Synthesis, an event structured around two main explanatory commitments: (1) Gradual evolution is explained by small genetic changes (variations) oriented by natural selection, a process leading to adaptation; (2) Evolutionary trends and speciational events are macroevolutionary phenomena that can be accounted for solely in terms of the extension of processes and mechanisms occurring at the previous microevolutionary level. On this view, natural selection holds a central explanatory role in evolutionary theory - one that presumably reaches back to Charles Darwin's Origin of Species - a view also accompanied by the belief that the field of evolutionary biology is organized around a profound divide: theories relying on strong selective factors and those appealing only to weak ones.If one reads the new analyses presented in this volume by biologists, historians and philosophers, this divide seems to be collapsing at a rapid pace, opening an era dedicated to the search for a new paradigm for the development of evolutionary biology. Contrary to popular belief, scholars' position on natural selection is not in itself a significant discriminatory factor between most evolutionists. In fact, the intellectual space is quite limited, if not non-existent, between, on the one hand, "Darwinists", who play down the central role of natural selection in evolutionary explanations, and, on the other hand, "non-Darwinists", who use it in a list of other evolutionary mechanisms.The "mechanism-centered" approach to evolutionary biology is too incomplete to fully make sense of its development. In this book the labels created under the traditional historiography - "Darwinian Revolution", "Eclipse of Darwinism", "Modern Synthesis", "Post-Synthetic Developments" - are thus re-evaluated.This book will not only appeal to researchers working in evolutionary biology, but also to historians and philosophers."

This book contests the general view that natural selection constitutes the explanatory core of evolutionary biology. It invites the reader to consider an alternative view which favors a more complete and multidimensional interpretation.It is common to present the 1930-1960 period as characterized by the rise of the Modern Synthesis, an event structured around two main explanatory commitments: (1) Gradual evolution is explained by small genetic changes (variations) oriented by natural selection, a process leading to adaptation; (2) Evolutionary trends and speciational events are macroevolutionary phenomena that can be accounted for solely in terms of the extension of processes and mechanisms occurring at the previous microevolutionary level. On this view, natural selection holds a central explanatory role in evolutionary theory - one that presumably reaches back to Charles Darwin's Origin of Species - a view also accompanied by the belief that the field of evolutionary biology is organized around a profound divide: theories relying on strong selective factors and those appealing only to weak ones.If one reads the new analyses presented in this volume by biologists, historians and philosophers, this divide seems to be collapsing at a rapid pace, opening an era dedicated to the search for a new paradigm for the development of evolutionary biology. Contrary to popular belief, scholars' position on natural selection is not in itself a significant discriminatory factor between most evolutionists. In fact, the intellectual space is quite limited, if not non-existent, between, on the one hand, "Darwinists", who play down the central role of natural selection in evolutionary explanations, and, on the other hand, "non-Darwinists", who use it in a list of other evolutionary mechanisms.The "mechanism-centered" approach to evolutionary biology is too incomplete to fully make sense of its development. In this book the labels created under the traditional historiography - "Darwinian Revolution", "Eclipse of Darwinism", "Modern Synthesis", "Post-Synthetic Developments" - are thus re-evaluated.This book will not only appeal to researchers working in evolutionary biology, but also to historians and philosophers."

This book is about evolutionary theory. It deals with aspects of its history to focus upon explanatory structures at work in the various forms of evolutionary theory - as such this is also a work of philosophy. Its focus lies on recent debates about the Modern Synthesis and what might be lacking in that synthesis. These claims have been most clearly made by those calling for an Extended Evolutionary Synthesis. The author argues that the difference between these two positions is the consequence of two things. First, whether evolution is a considered as solely a population level phenomenon or also a theory of form.  Second, the use of information concepts.In this book Darwinian evolution is positioned as a general theory of evolution, a theory that gave evolution a technical meaning as the statistical outcome of variation, competition, and inheritance. The Modern Synthesis (MS) within biology, has a particular focus, a particular architecture to its explanations that renders it a special theory of evolution.After providing a history of Darwinian theory and the MS, recent claims and exhortations for an Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES) are examined that see the need for the inclusion of non-genetic modes of inheritance and also developmental processes.  Much of this argument is based around claims that the MS adopts a particular view of information that has privileged the gene as an instructional unit in the emergence of form.  The author analyses the uses of information and claims that neither side of the debate explicitly and formally deals with this concept. A more formal view of information is provided which challenges the EES claims about the role of genes in MS explanations of form whilst being consilient with their own interests in developmental biology. It is concluded that the MS implicitly assumed this formal view of information whilst using information terms in a colloquial manner. In the final chapter the idea that the MS is an informational theory that acts to corral more specific phenomenal accounts, is mooted.  As such the book argues for a constrained pluralism within biology, where the MS describes those constraints.

This book is about evolutionary theory. It deals with aspects of its history to focus upon explanatory structures at work in the various forms of evolutionary theory - as such this is also a work of philosophy. Its focus lies on recent debates about the Modern Synthesis and what might be lacking in that synthesis. These claims have been most clearly made by those calling for an Extended Evolutionary Synthesis. The author argues that the difference between these two positions is the consequence of two things. First, whether evolution is a considered as solely a population level phenomenon or also a theory of form.  Second, the use of information concepts.In this book Darwinian evolution is positioned as a general theory of evolution, a theory that gave evolution a technical meaning as the statistical outcome of variation, competition, and inheritance. The Modern Synthesis (MS) within biology, has a particular focus, a particular architecture to its explanations that renders it a special theory of evolution.After providing a history of Darwinian theory and the MS, recent claims and exhortations for an Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES) are examined that see the need for the inclusion of non-genetic modes of inheritance and also developmental processes.  Much of this argument is based around claims that the MS adopts a particular view of information that has privileged the gene as an instructional unit in the emergence of form.  The author analyses the uses of information and claims that neither side of the debate explicitly and formally deals with this concept. A more formal view of information is provided which challenges the EES claims about the role of genes in MS explanations of form whilst being consilient with their own interests in developmental biology. It is concluded that the MS implicitly assumed this formal view of information whilst using information terms in a colloquial manner. In the final chapter the idea that the MS is an informational theory that acts to corral more specific phenomenal accounts, is mooted.  As such the book argues for a constrained pluralism within biology, where the MS describes those constraints.

The epistemological synthesis of the various theories of evolution, since the first formulation in 1802 with the transmission of the inherited characters by J.B. Lamarck, shows the need for an alternative synthesis to that of Princeton (1947). This new synthesis integrates the scientific models of self-organization developed during the second half of the 20th century based on the laws of physics, thermodynamics, and mathematics with the emergent evolutionary problematics such as self-organized memory.This book shows, how self-organization is integrated in modern evolutionary biology. It is divided in two parts: The first part pays attention to the modern observations in paleontology and biology, which include major theoreticians of the self-organization (d’Arcy Thompson, Henri Bergson, René Thom, Ilya Prigogine). The second part presents different emergent evolutionary models including the sciences of complexity, the non-linear dynamical systems, fractals, attractors, epigenesis, systemics, and mesology with different examples of the sciences of complexity and self-organization as observed in the human lineage, from both internal (embryogenesis-morphogenesis) and external (mesology) viewpoints.

The epistemological synthesis of the various theories of evolution, since the first formulation in 1802 with the transmission of the inherited characters by J.B. Lamarck, shows the need for an alternative synthesis to that of Princeton (1947). This new synthesis integrates the scientific models of self-organization developed during the second half of the 20th century based on the laws of physics, thermodynamics, and mathematics with the emergent evolutionary problematics such as self-organized memory.This book shows, how self-organization is integrated in modern evolutionary biology. It is divided in two parts: The first part pays attention to the modern observations in paleontology and biology, which include major theoreticians of the self-organization (d’Arcy Thompson, Henri Bergson, René Thom, Ilya Prigogine). The second part presents different emergent evolutionary models including the sciences of complexity, the non-linear dynamical systems, fractals, attractors, epigenesis, systemics, and mesology with different examples of the sciences of complexity and self-organization as observed in the human lineage, from both internal (embryogenesis-morphogenesis) and external (mesology) viewpoints.

This book is reflecting upon core theories in evolutionary biology – in a historical as well as contemporary context. Chapters 8, 20, 22 and 33 are available open access under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License via link.springer.com.

This book is reflecting upon core theories in evolutionary biology – in a historical as well as contemporary context. Chapters 8, 20, 22 and 33 are available open access under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License via link.springer.com.

The book discusses ideas concerning the order and balance of nature (or "economy of nature") from the late 17th century to the early 20th century. The perspective taken is broad, longue durée and interdisciplinary, and reveals the interplay of scientific, philosophical, moral and social ideas.  The story begins with natural theology (dating roughly to the onset of the so-called Newtonian Revolution) and ends with the First World War. The cut-off date has been chosen for the following reasons: the war changed the state of things, affecting man’s way of looking at, and relating to, nature both directly and indirectly; indeed, it put an end to most applications of Darwinism to society and history, including interpretations of war as a form of the struggle for existence. The author presents an overview of the different images of nature that were involved in these debates, especially in the late 19th century, when a largepart of the scientific community paid lip service to ‘Darwinism’, while practically each expert felt free to interpret it in his own distinct way. The book also touches on the so-called ‘social Darwinism’, which was neither a real theory, nor a common body of ideas, and its various views of society and nature’s economy. Part of this book deals with the persistence of moralizing images of nature in the work of many authors.  One of the main features of the book is its wealth of (detailed) quotations.  In this way the author gives the reader the opportunity to see the original statements on which the author bases his discussion. The author privileges the analysis of different positions over a historiography offering a merely linear narrative based on general implications of ideas and theories.  To revisit the concept of the so-called "Darwinian Revolution", we need to examine the various perspectives ofscientists and others, their language and, so to speak, the lenses they used when reading "facts" and theories. The book ends with some general reflections on Darwin and Darwinisms (the plural is important) as a case study on the relationship between intellectual history, the history of science and contextual history.Written by a historian, this book really gives new, multidisciplinary perspectives on the "Darwinian Revolution."

The book discusses ideas concerning the order and balance of nature (or "economy of nature") from the late 17th century to the early 20th century. The perspective taken is broad, longue durée and interdisciplinary, and reveals the interplay of scientific, philosophical, moral and social ideas.  The story begins with natural theology (dating roughly to the onset of the so-called Newtonian Revolution) and ends with the First World War. The cut-off date has been chosen for the following reasons: the war changed the state of things, affecting man’s way of looking at, and relating to, nature both directly and indirectly; indeed, it put an end to most applications of Darwinism to society and history, including interpretations of war as a form of the struggle for existence. The author presents an overview of the different images of nature that were involved in these debates, especially in the late 19th century, when a largepart of the scientific community paid lip service to ‘Darwinism’, while practically each expert felt free to interpret it in his own distinct way. The book also touches on the so-called ‘social Darwinism’, which was neither a real theory, nor a common body of ideas, and its various views of society and nature’s economy. Part of this book deals with the persistence of moralizing images of nature in the work of many authors.  One of the main features of the book is its wealth of (detailed) quotations.  In this way the author gives the reader the opportunity to see the original statements on which the author bases his discussion. The author privileges the analysis of different positions over a historiography offering a merely linear narrative based on general implications of ideas and theories.  To revisit the concept of the so-called "Darwinian Revolution", we need to examine the various perspectives ofscientists and others, their language and, so to speak, the lenses they used when reading "facts" and theories. The book ends with some general reflections on Darwin and Darwinisms (the plural is important) as a case study on the relationship between intellectual history, the history of science and contextual history.Written by a historian, this book really gives new, multidisciplinary perspectives on the "Darwinian Revolution."

This book focuses on a critical reexamination of two prominent categories used in modern historiography of biology – “the eclipse of Darwinism” and the “modern synthesis”. The main objective is to critically analyze the main existing interpretations of the “eclipse of Darwinism” and emergence of the “modern synthesis”, with particular emphasis on the philosophical assumptions adopted in these interpretations. Thus, interpretations by Ernst Mayr, Peter Bowler, Mark Largent and modern historians who challenge these perspectives are discussed and critically evaluated The analysis of the above interpretations makes it possible to determine how the philosophy of science limits the interpretation of the history of a given field, and also serves as a starting point for proposing an original interpretation of the above period in the history of evolutionary biology. The ultimate goal will therefore be a proposal of a new interpretative perspective to answer following questions: Why did the “eclipse of the Darwinism” occur? How should its origins to be understood? Why did it end (and why did the “modern synthesis” emerge)?Main thesis of this book is that the “eclipse” was a direct response to inconsistent ontology upon which Darwin built his theory of evolution. Darwin referred to terms and concepts rooted in the philosophy of essentialism, which was problematic, because he tried to apply these essentialist concepts to his vision of the ever-changing nature. Therefore, all of the anti-Darwinian theories characteristic to the “eclipse of Darwinism” and later to the “modern synthesis” were produced in an attempt to reconcile essentialism with evolution and thus to correct Darwin's philosophical “error.”The book will appeal to biologists, philosophers and historians alike.

This book focuses on a critical reexamination of two prominent categories used in modern historiography of biology – “the eclipse of Darwinism” and the “modern synthesis”. The main objective is to critically analyze the main existing interpretations of the “eclipse of Darwinism” and emergence of the “modern synthesis”, with particular emphasis on the philosophical assumptions adopted in these interpretations. Thus, interpretations by Ernst Mayr, Peter Bowler, Mark Largent and modern historians who challenge these perspectives are discussed and critically evaluated The analysis of the above interpretations makes it possible to determine how the philosophy of science limits the interpretation of the history of a given field, and also serves as a starting point for proposing an original interpretation of the above period in the history of evolutionary biology. The ultimate goal will therefore be a proposal of a new interpretative perspective to answer following questions: Why did the “eclipse of the Darwinism” occur? How should its origins to be understood? Why did it end (and why did the “modern synthesis” emerge)?Main thesis of this book is that the “eclipse” was a direct response to inconsistent ontology upon which Darwin built his theory of evolution. Darwin referred to terms and concepts rooted in the philosophy of essentialism, which was problematic, because he tried to apply these essentialist concepts to his vision of the ever-changing nature. Therefore, all of the anti-Darwinian theories characteristic to the “eclipse of Darwinism” and later to the “modern synthesis” were produced in an attempt to reconcile essentialism with evolution and thus to correct Darwin's philosophical “error.”The book will appeal to biologists, philosophers and historians alike.

This book introduces a new evolutionary model called “Hierarchical Evolutionary-Developmental Theory” or “H-Evo-Devo Theory.” This theory proposes that the organism’s internal properties reflect entities that are highly integrated in developmental terms that evolve hierarchically.

This book offers a meta-historical analysis of the “eclipse of Darwinism” narrative in evolutionary biology. It examines major historiographical labels – such as “Darwinism,” “anti-Darwinian,” “eclipse of Darwinism,” and “modern synthesis” – highlighting their varying uses in past and current historiography. This analysis not only invites a rethinking of how evolutionary biology’s development is periodized but also clarifies how historical narratives shape modern scientific practice by revealing the link between scientific practice and historical interpretation. Using a historical and epistemological perspective, the volume explores both the history of the “eclipse” period and how evolutionary biologists and historians have written that history. Its methodology integrates the study of historiographical traditions with analyses of scientific writings, popular accounts, and personal correspondence among scholars. The book concludes that the “eclipse” metaphor has lost heuristic value and that dividing biology into pre- and post-synthetic phases is misleading. Darwinism neither entered the 1880s–1920s as a unified program nor simply fragmented into isolated strands. Instead, evolutionary studies comprised diverse traditions that branched out and progressively specialized.