|
Showing 1 - 7 of
7 matches in All Departments
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."
The main goal of this book is to put the Darwinian tradition in
context by raising questions such as: How should it be defined? Did
it interact with other research programs? Were there any research
programs that developed largely independently of the Darwinian
tradition? Accordingly, the contributing authors explicitly explore
the nature of the relationship between the Darwinian tradition and
other research programs running in parallel. In the wake of the
Synthetic Theory of Evolution, which was established throughout the
1930s, 1940s, and 1950s, historians and philosophers of biology
devoted considerable attention to the Darwinian tradition, i.e.,
linking Charles Darwin to mid-Twentieth-Century developments in
evolutionary biology. Since then, more recent developments in
evolutionary biology have challenged, in part or entirely, the
heritage of the Darwinian tradition. Not surprisingly, this has in
turn been followed by a historiographical "recalibration" on the
part of historians and philosophers regarding other research
programs and traditions in evolutionary biology. In order to
acknowledge this shift, the papers in this book have been arranged
on the basis of two main threads: Part I: A perspective that views
Darwinism as either being originally pluralistic or having acquired
such a pluralistic nature through modifications and borrowings over
time. Part II: A perspective blurring the boundaries between
non-Darwinian and Darwinian traditions, either by contending that
Darwinism itself was never quite as Darwinian as previously
assumed, or that non-Darwinian traditions took on board various
Darwinian components, when not fertilizing Darwinism directly.
Between a Darwinism reaching out to other research programs and
non-Darwinian programs reaching out to Darwinism, the least that
can be said is that this interweaving of intellectual threads blurs
the historiographical field. This volume aims to open vital new
avenues for approaching and reflecting on the development of
evolutionary biology.
Widely seen as evolution's founding figure, Charles Darwin is taken
by many evolutionists to be the first to propose a truly modern
theory of evolution. Darwin's greatness, however, has obscured the
man and his work, at times even to the point of distortion.
Accessibly written, this book presents a more nuanced picture and
invites us to discover some neglected ambiguities and
contradictions in Darwin's masterwork. Delisle and Tierney show
Darwin to be a man who struggled to reconcile the received wisdom
of an unchanging natural world with his new ideas about evolution.
Arguing that Darwin was unable to break free entirely from his
contemporaries' more traditional outlook, they show his theory to
be a fascinating compromise between old and new. Rediscovering this
other Darwin - and this other side of On the Origin of Species -
helps shed new light on the immensity of the task that lay before
19th century scholars, as well as their ultimate achievements.
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 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."
The main goal of this book is to put the Darwinian tradition in
context by raising questions such as: How should it be defined? Did
it interact with other research programs? Were there any research
programs that developed largely independently of the Darwinian
tradition? Accordingly, the contributing authors explicitly explore
the nature of the relationship between the Darwinian tradition and
other research programs running in parallel. In the wake of the
Synthetic Theory of Evolution, which was established throughout the
1930s, 1940s, and 1950s, historians and philosophers of biology
devoted considerable attention to the Darwinian tradition, i.e.,
linking Charles Darwin to mid-Twentieth-Century developments in
evolutionary biology. Since then, more recent developments in
evolutionary biology have challenged, in part or entirely, the
heritage of the Darwinian tradition. Not surprisingly, this has in
turn been followed by a historiographical "recalibration" on the
part of historians and philosophers regarding other research
programs and traditions in evolutionary biology. In order to
acknowledge this shift, the papers in this book have been arranged
on the basis of two main threads: Part I: A perspective that views
Darwinism as either being originally pluralistic or having acquired
such a pluralistic nature through modifications and borrowings over
time. Part II: A perspective blurring the boundaries between
non-Darwinian and Darwinian traditions, either by contending that
Darwinism itself was never quite as Darwinian as previously
assumed, or that non-Darwinian traditions took on board various
Darwinian components, when not fertilizing Darwinism directly.
Between a Darwinism reaching out to other research programs and
non-Darwinian programs reaching out to Darwinism, the least that
can be said is that this interweaving of intellectual threads blurs
the historiographical field. This volume aims to open vital new
avenues for approaching and reflecting on the development of
evolutionary biology.
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.
|
You may like...
Hampstead
Diane Keaton, Brendan Gleeson, …
DVD
R66
Discovery Miles 660
|