scholarly journals Species, speciation and palaeontology up to the Modern Synthesis: persistent themes and unanswered questions

Palaeontology ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 56 (6) ◽  
pp. 1199-1223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Warren D. Allmon
1995 ◽  
Vol 40 (6) ◽  
pp. 555-556
Author(s):  
William A. Roberts

Author(s):  
Niles Eldredge

This study provides a stimulating critique of contemporary evolutionary thought, analyzing the Modern Synthesis first developed by Theodosius Dobzhansky, Ernst Mayr, and George Gaylord Simpson. The author argues that although only genes and organisms are taken as historic "individuals" in conventional theory, species, higher taxa, and ecological entities such as populations and communities should also be construed as individuals--an approach that yields the ecological and genealogical hierarchies that interact to produce evolution. This clearly stated, controversial work will provoke much debate among evolutionary biologists, systematists, paleontologists, and ecologists, as well as a wide range of educated lay readers.


Author(s):  
Flavia Fabris

This chapter reappraises Waddington’s processual theory of epigenetics and examines its implications for contemporary evolutionary biology. It focuses in particular on the ontological difference between two conflicting assumptions that have been conflated in the recent debate over the nature of cryptic variability: a substance view that is consistent with the modern synthesis and construes variability as a preexisting pool of random genetic variation; and a processual view, which derives from Waddington’s conception of developmental canalization and understands variability as an epigenetic process. The chapter also discusses how these opposing interpretations fare in their capacity to explain the genetic assimilation of acquired characters.


Author(s):  
Denis M. Walsh ◽  
Philippe Huneman

The modern evolutionary synthesis arose out of the conjunction of the Mendelian theory of inheritance and the neo-Darwinian theory of population change early in the 20th century.1 In the nearly 100 years since its inception, the modern evolutionary synthesis has grown to encompass practically all fields of comparative biology—ecology, ethology, paleontology, systematics, cell biology, physiology, genetics, development. Theodosius Dobzhansky’s dictum—“nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution” (...


Author(s):  
Philippe Huneman

Considering challenges to the modern synthesis (MS), this chapter reconstructs an explanatory scheme proper to the MS. It contrasts it with the explanatory scheme proper to some alternatives to the MS. It considers which empirical facts should compel us to adopt the alternative scheme, or stand with the MS, or consider a weakly attenuated form of its explanatory scheme. Hence the last section focuses on the form of variation: Given that many findings are accumulating concerning the not purely random nature of variation, it asks which specific patterns of variation would be likely to support an alternative explanatory scheme. It argues that neither biased variation nor random genotypic variation is likely to vindicate a specific explanatory scheme.


Since its origin in the early 20th century, the modern synthesis theory of evolution has grown to represent the orthodox view on the process of organic evolution. It is a powerful and successful theory. Its defining features include the prominence it accords to genes in the explanation of development and inheritance, and the role of natural selection as the cause of adaptation. Since the advent of the 21st century, however, the modern synthesis has been subject to repeated and sustained challenges. In the last two decades, evolutionary biology has witnessed unprecedented growth in the understanding of those processes that underwrite the development of organisms and the inheritance of characters. The empirical advances usher in challenges to the conceptual foundations of evolutionary theory. Many current commentators charge that the new biology of the 21st century calls for a revision, extension, or wholesale rejection of the modern synthesis theory of evolution. Defenders of the modern synthesis maintain that the theory can accommodate the exciting new advances in biology, without forfeiting its central precepts. The original essays collected in this volume—by evolutionary biologists, philosophers of science, and historians of biology—survey and assess the various challenges to the modern synthesis arising from the new biology of the 21st century. Taken together, the essays cover a spectrum of views, from those that contend that the modern synthesis can rise to the challenges of the new biology, with little or no revision required, to those that call for the abandonment of the modern synthesis.


Biosemiotics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Schaetzle ◽  
Yogi Hendlin

AbstractDenis Noble convincingly describes the artifacts of theory building in the Modern Synthesis as having been surpassed by the available evidence, indicating more active and less gene-centric evolutionary processes than previously thought. We diagnosis the failure of theory holders to dutifully update their beliefs according to new findings as a microcosm of the prevailing larger social inability to deal with competing paradigms. For understanding life, Noble suggests that there is no privileged level of semiotic interpretation. Understanding multi-level semiosis along with organism and environment contrapunctally, according to Jakob von Uexküll’s theoretical biology, can contribute to the emerging extended evolutionary synthesis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document