Difference between revisions of "Darwinism" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
m
 
(33 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Contracted}}{{Status}}Note: This is only a very rough draft, with notes that may be useful in developing the article. Please do not edit this article until the actual article is complete — i.e., when this notice is removed. You may add comments on what you would like to see included. [[User:Rick Swarts|Rick Swarts]] 01:31, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)
+
{{2Copyedited}}{{Ebcompleted}}{{Copyedited}}{{Paid}}{{Approved}}{{Images OK}}{{Submitted}}
 +
[[Image:Charles Darwin.jpg|frame|right|[[Charles Darwin]]]]
 +
'''Darwinism''' is a term that is generally considered synonymous with the [[Evolution#Theory of natural selection|theory of natural selection]]. This theory, which was developed by [[Charles Darwin]], holds that [[natural selection]] is the directive or creative force of [[evolution]].
  
 +
The term "Darwinism" also has been applied to the evolutionary theories of Charles Darwin in general, rather than just the theory of natural selection. It may also refer specifically to the role of Charles Darwin as opposed to others in the history of evolutionary thought—particularly contrasting Darwin's results with those of earlier theories, such as [[Lamarck|Lamarckism]], or with more modern versions, such as the [[modern evolutionary synthesis]].
  
 +
According to [[Ernst Mayr]] (1991), how the term "Darwinism" has been and is used depends on who is using it and the time period. On the other hand, Harvard evolutionist [[Stephen Jay Gould]], himself a popular writer on evolution, maintains that although the popular literature often equates Darwinism with evolution itself, the scientific community generally agrees that the term "should be restricted to the worldview encompassed by the theory of natural selection" (Gould 1982). That is, the term should be limited to the philosophical concept of Darwin's theory regarding the mechanism for evolutionary change.
 +
{{toc}}
 +
Since the time of the publication of Darwin's ''Origin of Species'' (1859), Darwinism has confronted challenges from both the [[science|scientific]] and [[religion|religious]] communities. Among persistent scientific challenges are the lack of evidences for natural selection as the causal agent of [[macroevolution|macroevolutionary]] change; the issue of whether evidences on the [[microevolution|microevolutionary]] level can be extrapolated to the macroevolutionary level; and the surprisingly rapid rate of speciation and prolonged stasis seen in the [[fossil]] record (see [[macroevolution]]). For religious adherents, the central role accorded "chance" in the evolution of new designs via natural selection is not proved and runs counter to the concept of a creator [[God]]. (See [[Darwinism#Challenges to Darwinism|Challenges to Darwinism]].)
  
From Encyclopedia Britannica: theory of the evolutionary mechanism propounded by Charles Darwin as an explanation of organic change. It denotes Darwin's specific view of how the process of evolution works. Beginning in 1837, Darwin proceeded to work on the now well-understood concept that evolution is essentially brought about by the interplay of three principles: (1) variation—a liberalizing factor, …
+
==Theory of natural selection==
 +
The [[Evolution#Theory of natural selection|theory of natural selection]] is one of two major [[evolution|evolutionary]] theories advanced by [[Darwin]], the other being the [[Evolution#Theory of descent with modification|theory of descent with modification]]. The theory of descent with modification deals with the pattern of evolution: groups of organisms are related with one another, sharing common ancestors from which they have descended. The theory of natural selection (or "theory of modification through natural selection") deals with the process or mechanism of evolution: how the evolutionary change occurred in order to arrive at the pattern.
  
Notes: ... The term "Darwinism", ... has numerous meanings depending on who has used the term and at what period. A better understanding of the meaning of this term is only one reason to call attention to the composite nature of Darwin's evolutionary thought.
+
[[Natural selection]] is the mechanism whereby populations of individuals with favorable traits reproduce more than individuals that lack such beneficial traits, and populations of individuals with deleterious traits reproduce less than individuals without such harmful traits. Over time, this results in a trend toward individuals with traits more conducive to their survival and reproduction. According to this theory, natural selection is the directive or creative force of evolution, creating new [[species]] and new designs, rather than just a force for weeding out unfit organisms.  
... One particulary cogent reason why Darwinism cannot be a single monolithic theory is that organic evolution consists of two essentially independent processes, as we have seen: transformation in time, and diversification in ecological and geographical space. The two processes require a minimum of two entirely independent and very different theories.  
 
... I consider it necessary to dissect Darwin's conceptual framework of evolution into a number of major theories that formed the basis of his evolutionary thinking. For the sake of convenience, I have partitioned Darwin's evolutionary paradigm into five theories, but of course others might prefer a different division. The selected theories are by no means all of Darwin's evolutionary theories; others were, for instance, sexual selection, pangenesis, effect of use and disuse, and character divergence. However when later authors referred to Darwin's theory thay invariably had a combination of some of the following five theories in mind:
 
  
Evolution as such. This is the theory that the world is not constant or recently created nor perpetually cycling, but rather is steadily changing, and that organisms are transformed in time.
+
In a modern definition of the term, a Darwinian process requires the following schema:
Common descent. This is the theory that every group of organisms descended from a common ancestor, and that all groups of organisms, including animals, plants, and microorganisms, ultimately go back to a single origin of life on earth.
 
Multiplication of species. This theory explains the origin of the enormous organic diversity. It postulates that species multiply, either by splitting into daughter species or by "budding", that is, by the establishment of geographically isloated founder populations that evolve into new species.
 
Gradualism. According to this theory, evolutionary change takes place through the gradual change of populations and not by the sudden (saltational) production of new individuals that represent a new type.
 
Natural selection. According to this theory, evolutionary change comes about throught the abundant production of genetic variation in every generation. The relatively few individuals who survive, owing to a particularly well-adapted combination of inheritable characters, give rise to the next generation.
 
  
 +
# '''Self-replication/[[Inheritance]]:''' Some number of entities must be capable of producing copies of themselves, and those copies must also be capable of reproduction. The new copies must inherit the traits of old ones. Sometimes, the different variations are recombined in [[sexual reproduction]].
 +
# '''Variation:''' There must be a range of different traits in the population of entities, and there must be a mechanism for introducing new variations into the population.
 +
# '''Selection:''' Inherited traits must somehow affect the ability of the entities to reproduce themselves, either by survival or by the ability to produce offspring by finding partners.
  
From a dictionary definition: A theory of biological evolution developed by Charles Darwin and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. Also called Darwinian theory.  
+
If the entity or organism survives to reproduce, the process restarts. Sometimes, in stricter formulations, it is required that variation and selection act on different entities, variation on the replicator ([[genotype]]) and selection on the interactor ([[phenotype]]).  
  
Comments from Ed Poor discussion:
+
Darwinism asserts that in any system given these conditions, by whatever means, evolution is likely to occur. That is, over time, the entities will accumulate complex traits that favor their reproduction. This is called Universal Darwinism, a term coined by Richard Dawkins in his 1972 book ''Selfish Gene.''
The definition of Darwinism was (until LDC changed it):
 
:all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual s ability to compete, survive, and reproduce.  
 
  
This definition (a) does not say where the variations come from but (b) implies that natural selection causes the variations.
+
Some scientists, including Darwin, maintain that natural selection only works on the level of the organism. Others, such as [[Stephen Jay Gould|Gould]], believe in hierarchical levels of selection—that natural selection can work both on individuals or groups of individuals, such that some populations or species may have favorable traits that promote their survival and reproduction over other species or populations. Richard Dawkins maintained that natural selection worked on the level of the [[gene]], although this has been generally discredited in scientific circles.
  
I thought that natural selection just determines which variations persist.
+
On the [[microevolution|microevolutionary]] level (change within species), there are evidences that natural selection can produce evolutionary change. For example, changes in gene frequencies can be observed in populations of fruit flies exposed to selective pressures in the laboratory environment. Likewise, systematic changes in various phenotypes within a species, such as color changes in [[moth]]s, can be observed in field studies. However, evidence that natural selection is the directive force of change in terms of the origination of new designs (such as the development of feathers) or major transitions between higher taxa (such as the evolution of land-dwelling vertebrates from fish) is not observable. Evidence for such [[macroevolution|macroevolutionary]] change is limited to extrapolation from changes on the microevolutionary level. A number of top evolutionists, including Gould, challenge the validity of making such extrapolations.
  
So a better definition would be:
+
== History of the term Darwinism ==
:all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual s ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. How these variations come into being is anyone s guess.
+
In [[Darwin]]'s day, there was no rigid definition of the term "Darwinism," and it was used by proponents and opponents of Darwin's biological theory alike to mean whatever they wanted it to in a larger context. In the nineteenth-century context in which Darwin's ''Origin of Species'' was first received, "Darwinism" came to stand for an entire range of evolutionary (and often revolutionary) philosophies about both biology and society.  
  
Ed Poor
+
One of the more prominent approaches was that summed up in the phrase "survival of the fittest" by the philosopher [[Herbert Spencer]]. This was later taken to be emblematic of Darwinism, even though Spencer's own understanding of evolution was more [[Lamarck|Lamarckian]] than Darwinian, and predated the publication of Darwin's theory.
  
:No, that wouldn t be a better definition, that would be a lie. We _do_ know what many of the causes are. The fact that there might be others isn t really relevant, and if we find them we ll add them to the picture. If we don t find them, there s little reason to blindly speculate about them. LDC
+
What we now call "[[Social Darwinism]]" was, in its day, synonymous with one use of the word "Darwinism"—the application of Darwinian principles of "struggle" to society, usually in support of anti-philanthropic political agendas. Another interpretation, one notably favored by Darwin's cousin [[Francis Galton]], was that Darwinism implied that natural selection was apparently no longer working on "civilized" people, thus it was possible for "inferior" strains of people (who would normally be filtered out of the gene pool) to overwhelm the "superior" strains, and corrective measures would have to be undertaken—the foundation of [[eugenics]].  
  
:: Okay, so is Darwinism the theory that speciation is caused only by natural processes such as radiation mutating the genes and NOT by God? This would make his theory just as scientific as a Big Banger saying the universe was created by some force other than God. Both ideas seem a bit philosophical to me, but maybe I m getting confused by not knowing the meanings of the various words. Anyway, I m trying not to trash the articles and keeping (most of) my quibbles in the Talk sections. How am I doing? :-) Ed Poor
+
Many of the ideas called "Darwinism" had only a rough resemblance to the theory of Charles Darwin. For example, [[Ernst Haeckel]] developed what was known as ''Darwinisms'' in [[Germany]]; though it should be noted that his ideas was not centered around natural selection at all.
 +
 +
To distinguish themselves from the very loose meaning of Darwinism prevalent in the nineteenth century, those who advocated [[evolution]] by [[natural selection]] after the death of Darwin became known as neo-Darwinists. The term "[[neo-Darwinism]]" itself was coined by George John Romanes in 1896 to designate the Darwinism proposed by August Weismann and [[Alfred Russel Wallace]], in which the exclusivity of [[natural selection]] was promoted and the inheritance of acquired characteristics (Larmarckism) was rejected (Mayr 2001; Gould 2002). At that time, near the end of the nineteenth century, there was a strong debate between the neo-Larmarckians and the neo-Darwinians.
  
 +
The term [[neo-Darwinism]] was not terribly popular in the scientific community until after the development of the [[modern evolutionary synthesis]] in the 1930s, when the term became synonymous with the synthesis. The modern meaning of neo-Darwinism is not "genealogically linked" to the earlier definition (Gould 2002).
  
Please tell me, someone, if the following idea is merely a quibble or is actually significant.
+
== Darwinism and other -isms ==
 +
It is felt by some that the term "Darwinism" is sometimes used by [[creationism|creationists]] as a somewhat derogatory term for "evolutionary biology," in that casting of evolution as an "ism"—a doctrine or belief—strengthens calls for "equal time" for other beliefs, such as creationism or [[intelligent design]]. However, top evolutionary scientists, such as Gould and Mayr, have used the term repeatedly, without any derogatory connotations.
  
Evolution occurs through (a) an unknown cause making new species and (b) the weeding out process (natural selection).
+
==Challenges to Darwinism==
 +
In addition to the difficulty of getting evidence for [[natural selection]] being the causal agent of change on macroevolutionary levels, as noted above, there are fundamental challenges to the [[Evolution#Theory of natural selection|theory of natural selection]] itself. These come from both the scientific and religious communities.  
  
My question is the identity of the unknown cause. Is it background radiation, such as cosmic rays, causing random mutation? Could it be God?
+
Such challenges to the theory of natural selection are not a new development. Unlike the [[Evolution#Theory of descent with modification|theory of descent with modification]], which was accepted by the scientific community during Darwin's time and for which substantial evidences have been marshaled, the theory of natural selection was not widely accepted until the mid-1900s and remains controversial even today.
  
 +
In some cases, key arguments against natural selection being the main or sole agent of evolutionary change come from evolutionary scientists. One concern for example, is whether the origin of new designs and evolutionary trends ([[macroevolution]]) can be explained adequately as an extrapolation of changes in gene frequencies within populations ([[microevolution]]) (Luria, Gould, and Singer 1981). (See [[macroevolution]] for an overview of such critiques, including complications relating to the rate of observed macroevolutionary changes.)
  
Another definition: Darwinism
+
[[Evolution#Symbiogenesis|Symbiogenesis]], the theory that holds that evolutionary change is initiated by a long-term [[symbiosis]] of dissimilar organisms, offers a scientific challenge to the source of variation and reduces the primacy of natural selection as the agent of major evolutionary change. Margulis and Sagan (2002) hold that random [[mutation]] is greatly overemphasized as the source of hereditary variation in standard [[Neo-Darwinism|Neo-Darwinistic]] doctrine. Rather, they maintain, the major source of transmitted variation actually comes from the acquisition of [[genome]]s—in other words, entire sets of [[gene]]s, in the form of whole [[organism]]s, are acquired and incorporated by other organisms. This long-term biological fusion of organisms, beginning as symbiosis, is held to be the agent of species evolution.
      n : a theory of organic evolution claiming that new species
 
          arise and are perpetuated by natural selection [syn:
 
          Darwinism]
 
  
 +
Historically, the strongest opposition to Darwinism, in the sense of being a synonym for the theory of natural selection, has come from those advocating [[religion|religious]] viewpoints. In essence, the chance component involved in the creation of new designs, which is inherent in the theory of natural selection, runs counter to the concept of a [[God|Supreme Being]] who has designed and created humans and all phyla. Chance (stochastic processes, randomness) is centrally involved in the theory of natural selection. As noted by eminent evolutionist [[Ernst Mayr]] (2001, pp. 120, 228, 281), chance plays an important role in two steps. First, the production of genetic variation "is almost exclusively a chance phenomena." Secondly, chance plays an important role even in "the process of the elimination of less fit individuals," and particularly during periods of [[mass extinction]].
  
Definitions from macroDevelopment:
+
This element of chance counters the view that the development of new evolutionary designs, including [[human]]s, was a progressive, purposeful creation by a Creator God. Rather than the end result, according to the theory of natural selection, human beings were an accident, the end of a long, chance-filled process involving adaptations to local environments. There is no higher purpose, no progressive development, just [[materialism|materialistic]] forces at work. The observed harmony in the world becomes an artifact of such adaptations of organisms to each other and to the local environment. Such views are squarely at odds with many religious interpretations.
  
Creationism can simply mean the belief that there is a Creator. However it usually refers to young earth creationism, which has been deftly defined as the rewriting of science to fit a certain view of scripture. Also see Concordism and Relativistic Hermeneutics.
+
A key point of contention between the worldview is, therefore, the issue of variability—its origin and selection. For a Darwinist, random [[gene|genetic]] [[mutation]] provides a mechanism of introducing novel variability, and natural selection acts on the variability. For those believing in a creator God, the introduced variability is not random, but directed by the Creator, although natural selection may act on the variability, more in the manner of removing unfit organisms than in any creative role. Some role may also be accorded differential selection, such as [[mass extinction]]s. Neither of these worldviews—random variation and the purposeless, non-progressive role of natural selection, or purposeful, progressive variation—are conclusively proved or unproved by scientific methodology, and both are theoretically possible.
  
Darwinism The theory that natural selection operates on variations in older species to produce offspring that can be called new species, and that this explains the appearance of all species - see neo-darwinism. Unlike what most people think, Darwin did not claim the variations were random, nor does the theory assume the starting material was non-living matter. Because of these important details, the theory is a far cry from the modern theory of neo-darwinism.
+
There are some scientists who feel that the importance accorded to genes in natural selection may be overstated. According to Jonathan Wells, genetic expression in developing [[embryo]]s is impacted by [[morphology]] as well, such as membranes and cytoskeletal structure. [[DNA]] is seen as providing the means for coding of the [[protein]]s, but not necessarily the development of the embryo, the instructions of which must reside elsewhere. It is possible that the importance of [[sexual reproduction]] and [[genetic recombination]] in introducing variability also may be understated.  
The term darwinism is often used when what is really meant is neo-darwinism.
 
  
Evolution has several meanings. 1) Life has a history of change through time. 2) Living things are all related by descent from common ancestors. 3) Darwin's theory of natural selection. 4) Life arose by chance, therefore there is no creator.
+
The history of conflict between Darwinism and [[religion]] often has been exacerbated by confusion and dogmatism on both sides. Evolutionary arguments often are set up against the straw man of a dogmatic, [[Bible|biblical]] fundamentalism in which God created each species separately and the earth is only 6,000 years old. Thus, an either-or dichotomy is created, in which one believes either in the theory of natural selection or an earth only thousands of years old. However, young-earth [[creationism]] is only a small subset of the diversity of religious belief, and theistic, teleological explanations of the origin of species may be much more sophisticated and aligned with scientific findings. On the other hand, evolutionary adherents have sometimes presented an equally dogmatic front, refusing to acknowledge well thought out challenges to the theory of natural selection, or allowing for the possibility of alternative, theistic presentations.
The word evolution can mean any combination of these definitions and can sometimes be determined from the context. Unfortunately, often the meaning is ambiguous. In almost every article where you see the word "evolution" the author has the mistaken impression that there is only one meaning to the word, and it refers to the most modern theory. Other times it could mean only that life has changed on the earth. It is helpful to keep in mind is that it is only a modern phenomenon that in most minds there are only two possibilities for origins: atheistic materialism or 6 day creation.
 
  
 +
==References==
 +
*Darwin, C. 1859. ''On the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.'' London: John Murray, Albemarle Street. Reprinted: Gramercy, 1995.
 +
*Gould, S. J. 1982. Darwinism and the expansion of evolutionary theory. ''Science'' 216:380-387.
 +
*Gould, S. J. 2002. ''The Structure of Evolutionary Thought.'' Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
 +
*Luria, S. E., S. J. Gould, and S. Singer. 1981. ''A View of Life.'' Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummings.
 +
*Margulis, L., and D. Sagan. 2002. ''Acquiring Genomes: A Theory of the Origins of Species''. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0465043917.
 +
*Mayr, E. 1982. ''The Growth of Biological Thought: Diversity, Evolution, and Inheritance.'' Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
 +
*Mayr, E. 1991. ''One Long Argument: Charles Darwin and the Genesis of Modern Evolutionary Thought.'' Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
 +
*Mayr, E. 2002. ''What Evolution Is.'' New York: Basic Books.
 +
*Wells, J. 2000. ''Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? Why Much of What We Teach About Evolution is Wrong.'' Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing.
  
  
Is it any more scientific to say it s not God than that it is God?
+
{{credit|40486380}}
 
+
[[Category:Life sciences]]
Maybe God put gravity on automatic, so to speak. If God exists and God created gravity, He might not be performing a miracle everytime something heavy falls to the ground.
 
 
 
But maybe God created each species of life miraculously. It apparently took millions of years, and He might not have found it boring to tweak His design from time to time and see what came of it.
 
 
 
I think natural selection is an excellent hypothesis and entitled to be called a scientific theory. I m not sure it s a law like MA quite yet.
 
 
 
:That s called or depending on whether or not you think he interfered after creation.
 
 
 
:I suppose the scientific answer to that is "Well, I suppose it could be that way, but so what if it is?" If God s actions are indistinguishable from God s inaction (or non-existence), then what s the point of making a distinction? See .
 
 
 
 
 
Darwinian evolution requires that species undergo change, that these changes are inherited, and that they affect fitness. The primary causes of change known to science are sexual reproduction (combination of DNA from two parents) and random mutation, usually caused by radiation (for example, we can cause bacteria in culture to evolve faster by irradiating them). There might well be other causes, such as chemical toxins, human genetic engineering, God, whatever.
 
 
 
As I ve seen the term used, "Darwinism" most often refers to any Darwinian process, biological or otherwise. I m removing your definition and placing it here, because I really don t think it reflects actual usage of the word except maybe among creationists, and such a parochial definition of a term used for rhetoric has no place in a general-audience encyclopedia. LDC
 
 
 
:It wasn t my definition, I just found it there and quoted it here. Ed Poor
 
 
 
:Perhaps a NPOV definition of Darwinism would simply be "the theory of evolution espoused by Darwin." I don t mean anything sinister about it, but if the suffix "-ism" somehow seems derogatory maybe it s not a useful word. Marxism, on the other hand, seems to denote a particular flavor of communist thought. Hmm. Ed Poor
 
 
 
:A theory of biological developed by and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the of small, inherited variations that increase the individual s ability to compete, survive, and reproduce.
 
 
 
:Darwinism is actually a "meta-theory" which encompasses a number of independent sub-theories: , , , , , .
 
 
 
 
 
I removed the following paragraph because (1) It s about biological evolution, and this article clearly states that its topic is not biological evolution; and (2) It s from a book whose authors are not biologists or otherwise respected scientists, so their opinions on the matter are uninformed, deceptive, and unworthy of inclusion.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
"Although neo-Darwinian theory requires vast periods of time for the step-by-step development of new biological organs and body plans, fossil finds have repeatedly confirmed a pattern of explosive appearance followed by prolonged stability of living forms. Moreover, the fossil record shows a "top-down" hierarchical pattern of appearance in which major structural themes or body plans emerge before minor variations on those themes.22 Not only does this pattern directly contradict the "bottom-up" pattern predicted by neo-Darwinism, but as University of San Francisco marine paleobiologist Paul Chien and several colleagues have argued,23 it also strongly resembles the pattern evident in the history of human technological design, again suggesting actual (i.e., intelligent) design as the best explanation for the data."
 
 
 
Church position must have a prominent section IMO, creationism being the main opponent.
 
 
 
BTW I stumbled upon the following claim:
 
: John Paul II wrote a letter to the Pontificial Academy of Sciences in 1997 advising Vatican scientists (and Catholics at large) that the Church doesn?t have a problem with the scientific theory of evolution
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
:''This article is about Darwinism as a philosophical concept; see [[evolution]] for the page on biological evolution; [[modern evolutionary synthesis]] for neo-Darwinism; and also [[evolution (disambiguation)]]''.
 
 
 
[[Image:Charles Darwin.jpg|frame|right|[[Charles Darwin]]]]
 
 
 
'''Darwinism''' is a term used for various processes related to the ideas of [[Charles Darwin]], particularly concerning [[evolution]] and [[natural selection]]. ''Darwinism'' in this sense is not synonymous with ''evolution'', but rather with ''evolution by natural selection''. Modern biology suggests a number of other mechanisms involved in evolution which were unknown to Darwin, such as [[genetic drift]].
 
 
 
Also, Darwinism may be used to contrast it with other, discredited mechanisms of evolution that were historically thought possible, such as [[Lamarckism]] or [[mutationism]].  More recently, [[intelligent design]] [[creationists]] have used the word to contrast accepted evolutionary biology with their [[pseudoscientific]] ideas.
 
 
 
To say that Darwinism is often used by biologists is an understatement that verges on bathos; Darwinian random variation and subsequent selection is occasionally used by mathematicians to describe evolutionary processes that resemble the evolution of life, such as the development of software with [[genetic algorithm]]s.
 
 
 
In the 19th-century context in which Darwin's ''[[Origin of Species]]'' was first received, "Darwinism" came to stand for an entire range of evolutionary (and often revolutionary) philosophies about both biology and society. One of the more prominent approaches was that summed in the phrase "[[survival of the fittest]]" by the philosopher [[Herbert Spencer]], which was later taken to be emblematic of Darwinism even though Spencer's own understanding of evolution was more Lamarckian than Darwinian. What we now call "[[Social Darwinism]]" was, in its day, synonymous with "Darwinism" — the application of Darwinian principles of "struggle" to society, usually in support of anti-[[philanthropy|philanthropic]] political agendas. Another interpretation, one notably favored by Darwin's cousin [[Francis Galton]], was that Darwinism implied that because natural selection was apparently no longer working on "civilized" people it was possible for "inferior" strains of people (who would normally be filtered out of the gene pool) to overwhelm the "superior" strains, and corrective measures would have to be undertaken — the foundation of [[eugenics]].
 
 
 
In Darwin's day there was no rigid definition of the term "Darwinism", and it was used by opponents and proponents of Darwin's biological theory alike to mean whatever they wanted it to in a larger context.
 
 
 
In a modern definition of the term, a Darwinian process requires the following schema:
 
 
 
# '''[[Self-replication]]'''/[[Inheritance]]: Some number of entities must be capable of producing copies of themselves, and those copies must also be capable of reproduction. The new copies must inherit the traits of old ones. Sometimes the different variations are recombined in [[sexual reproduction]].
 
# '''[[Genetic variation|Variation]]''': There must be a range of different traits in the population of entities, and there must be a mechanism for introducing new variations into the population.
 
# '''[[Selection]]''': Inherited traits must somehow affect the ability of the entities to reproduce themselves, either by survival, or natural selection, or by ability to produce offspring by finding partners, or sexual selection.
 
 
 
If the entity or organism survives to reproduce, the process restarts. Sometimes, in stricter formulations, it is required that variation and selection act on different entities, variation on the [[replicator]] ([[genotype]]) and selection on the [[interactor]] ([[phenotype]]).
 
 
 
Darwinism asserts that any system given these conditions, by whatever means, evolution is likely to occur. That is, over time, the entities will accumulate complex traits that favor their reproduction. (''Universal Darwinism'')
 
 
 
===Application and examples===
 
 
 
Most obviously, this can refer to biological [[evolution]].  However, it has other potential spheres, the best known of which is the [[meme]], a concept of inheritance and modification of ideas introduced by [[Richard Dawkins]] in his [[1976]] book ''[[The Selfish Gene]]''. It has been disputed if this was a Darwinian process, since it is unproven that memes undergo random mutations.
 
 
 
Another example to illustrate are computer systems ([[Personal computer|PCs]]). Taking the software as the replicator and the whole system as the interactor, it could be seen as a Darwinian system, however, the code does not change randomly, but is directionally changed or rewritten from scratch; also systems do not reproduce.
 
 
 
[[Daniel Dennett]] (1995) in ''[[Darwin's Dangerous Idea]]'' argues for universal Darwinism.
 
 
 
==External links==
 
*[http://charles-darwin.classic-literature.co.uk/ Charles Darwin Books]
 
*[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/darwinism/ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry]
 
 
 
 
[[Category:Evolution]]
 
[[Category:Evolution]]
 
[[da:Darwinisme]]
 
[[de:Darwinismus]]
 
[[es:Darwinismo]]
 
[[lt:Darvinizmas]]
 
[[nl:Darwinisme]]
 
[[ja:ダーウィニズム]]
 
[[no:Darwinisme]]
 
[[pl:Darwinizm]]
 
[[pt:Darwinismo]]
 
[[sv:Darwinism]]
 
 
{{credit|22183462}}
 
[[Category:Life sciences]]
 

Latest revision as of 22:45, 11 July 2016

Darwinism is a term that is generally considered synonymous with the theory of natural selection. This theory, which was developed by Charles Darwin, holds that natural selection is the directive or creative force of evolution.

The term "Darwinism" also has been applied to the evolutionary theories of Charles Darwin in general, rather than just the theory of natural selection. It may also refer specifically to the role of Charles Darwin as opposed to others in the history of evolutionary thought—particularly contrasting Darwin's results with those of earlier theories, such as Lamarckism, or with more modern versions, such as the modern evolutionary synthesis.

According to Ernst Mayr (1991), how the term "Darwinism" has been and is used depends on who is using it and the time period. On the other hand, Harvard evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould, himself a popular writer on evolution, maintains that although the popular literature often equates Darwinism with evolution itself, the scientific community generally agrees that the term "should be restricted to the worldview encompassed by the theory of natural selection" (Gould 1982). That is, the term should be limited to the philosophical concept of Darwin's theory regarding the mechanism for evolutionary change.

Since the time of the publication of Darwin's Origin of Species (1859), Darwinism has confronted challenges from both the scientific and religious communities. Among persistent scientific challenges are the lack of evidences for natural selection as the causal agent of macroevolutionary change; the issue of whether evidences on the microevolutionary level can be extrapolated to the macroevolutionary level; and the surprisingly rapid rate of speciation and prolonged stasis seen in the fossil record (see macroevolution). For religious adherents, the central role accorded "chance" in the evolution of new designs via natural selection is not proved and runs counter to the concept of a creator God. (See Challenges to Darwinism.)

Theory of natural selection

The theory of natural selection is one of two major evolutionary theories advanced by Darwin, the other being the theory of descent with modification. The theory of descent with modification deals with the pattern of evolution: groups of organisms are related with one another, sharing common ancestors from which they have descended. The theory of natural selection (or "theory of modification through natural selection") deals with the process or mechanism of evolution: how the evolutionary change occurred in order to arrive at the pattern.

Natural selection is the mechanism whereby populations of individuals with favorable traits reproduce more than individuals that lack such beneficial traits, and populations of individuals with deleterious traits reproduce less than individuals without such harmful traits. Over time, this results in a trend toward individuals with traits more conducive to their survival and reproduction. According to this theory, natural selection is the directive or creative force of evolution, creating new species and new designs, rather than just a force for weeding out unfit organisms.

In a modern definition of the term, a Darwinian process requires the following schema:

  1. Self-replication/Inheritance: Some number of entities must be capable of producing copies of themselves, and those copies must also be capable of reproduction. The new copies must inherit the traits of old ones. Sometimes, the different variations are recombined in sexual reproduction.
  2. Variation: There must be a range of different traits in the population of entities, and there must be a mechanism for introducing new variations into the population.
  3. Selection: Inherited traits must somehow affect the ability of the entities to reproduce themselves, either by survival or by the ability to produce offspring by finding partners.

If the entity or organism survives to reproduce, the process restarts. Sometimes, in stricter formulations, it is required that variation and selection act on different entities, variation on the replicator (genotype) and selection on the interactor (phenotype).

Darwinism asserts that in any system given these conditions, by whatever means, evolution is likely to occur. That is, over time, the entities will accumulate complex traits that favor their reproduction. This is called Universal Darwinism, a term coined by Richard Dawkins in his 1972 book Selfish Gene.

Some scientists, including Darwin, maintain that natural selection only works on the level of the organism. Others, such as Gould, believe in hierarchical levels of selection—that natural selection can work both on individuals or groups of individuals, such that some populations or species may have favorable traits that promote their survival and reproduction over other species or populations. Richard Dawkins maintained that natural selection worked on the level of the gene, although this has been generally discredited in scientific circles.

On the microevolutionary level (change within species), there are evidences that natural selection can produce evolutionary change. For example, changes in gene frequencies can be observed in populations of fruit flies exposed to selective pressures in the laboratory environment. Likewise, systematic changes in various phenotypes within a species, such as color changes in moths, can be observed in field studies. However, evidence that natural selection is the directive force of change in terms of the origination of new designs (such as the development of feathers) or major transitions between higher taxa (such as the evolution of land-dwelling vertebrates from fish) is not observable. Evidence for such macroevolutionary change is limited to extrapolation from changes on the microevolutionary level. A number of top evolutionists, including Gould, challenge the validity of making such extrapolations.

History of the term Darwinism

In Darwin's day, there was no rigid definition of the term "Darwinism," and it was used by proponents and opponents of Darwin's biological theory alike to mean whatever they wanted it to in a larger context. In the nineteenth-century context in which Darwin's Origin of Species was first received, "Darwinism" came to stand for an entire range of evolutionary (and often revolutionary) philosophies about both biology and society.

One of the more prominent approaches was that summed up in the phrase "survival of the fittest" by the philosopher Herbert Spencer. This was later taken to be emblematic of Darwinism, even though Spencer's own understanding of evolution was more Lamarckian than Darwinian, and predated the publication of Darwin's theory.

What we now call "Social Darwinism" was, in its day, synonymous with one use of the word "Darwinism"—the application of Darwinian principles of "struggle" to society, usually in support of anti-philanthropic political agendas. Another interpretation, one notably favored by Darwin's cousin Francis Galton, was that Darwinism implied that natural selection was apparently no longer working on "civilized" people, thus it was possible for "inferior" strains of people (who would normally be filtered out of the gene pool) to overwhelm the "superior" strains, and corrective measures would have to be undertaken—the foundation of eugenics.

Many of the ideas called "Darwinism" had only a rough resemblance to the theory of Charles Darwin. For example, Ernst Haeckel developed what was known as Darwinisms in Germany; though it should be noted that his ideas was not centered around natural selection at all.

To distinguish themselves from the very loose meaning of Darwinism prevalent in the nineteenth century, those who advocated evolution by natural selection after the death of Darwin became known as neo-Darwinists. The term "neo-Darwinism" itself was coined by George John Romanes in 1896 to designate the Darwinism proposed by August Weismann and Alfred Russel Wallace, in which the exclusivity of natural selection was promoted and the inheritance of acquired characteristics (Larmarckism) was rejected (Mayr 2001; Gould 2002). At that time, near the end of the nineteenth century, there was a strong debate between the neo-Larmarckians and the neo-Darwinians.

The term neo-Darwinism was not terribly popular in the scientific community until after the development of the modern evolutionary synthesis in the 1930s, when the term became synonymous with the synthesis. The modern meaning of neo-Darwinism is not "genealogically linked" to the earlier definition (Gould 2002).

Darwinism and other -isms

It is felt by some that the term "Darwinism" is sometimes used by creationists as a somewhat derogatory term for "evolutionary biology," in that casting of evolution as an "ism"—a doctrine or belief—strengthens calls for "equal time" for other beliefs, such as creationism or intelligent design. However, top evolutionary scientists, such as Gould and Mayr, have used the term repeatedly, without any derogatory connotations.

Challenges to Darwinism

In addition to the difficulty of getting evidence for natural selection being the causal agent of change on macroevolutionary levels, as noted above, there are fundamental challenges to the theory of natural selection itself. These come from both the scientific and religious communities.

Such challenges to the theory of natural selection are not a new development. Unlike the theory of descent with modification, which was accepted by the scientific community during Darwin's time and for which substantial evidences have been marshaled, the theory of natural selection was not widely accepted until the mid-1900s and remains controversial even today.

In some cases, key arguments against natural selection being the main or sole agent of evolutionary change come from evolutionary scientists. One concern for example, is whether the origin of new designs and evolutionary trends (macroevolution) can be explained adequately as an extrapolation of changes in gene frequencies within populations (microevolution) (Luria, Gould, and Singer 1981). (See macroevolution for an overview of such critiques, including complications relating to the rate of observed macroevolutionary changes.)

Symbiogenesis, the theory that holds that evolutionary change is initiated by a long-term symbiosis of dissimilar organisms, offers a scientific challenge to the source of variation and reduces the primacy of natural selection as the agent of major evolutionary change. Margulis and Sagan (2002) hold that random mutation is greatly overemphasized as the source of hereditary variation in standard Neo-Darwinistic doctrine. Rather, they maintain, the major source of transmitted variation actually comes from the acquisition of genomes—in other words, entire sets of genes, in the form of whole organisms, are acquired and incorporated by other organisms. This long-term biological fusion of organisms, beginning as symbiosis, is held to be the agent of species evolution.

Historically, the strongest opposition to Darwinism, in the sense of being a synonym for the theory of natural selection, has come from those advocating religious viewpoints. In essence, the chance component involved in the creation of new designs, which is inherent in the theory of natural selection, runs counter to the concept of a Supreme Being who has designed and created humans and all phyla. Chance (stochastic processes, randomness) is centrally involved in the theory of natural selection. As noted by eminent evolutionist Ernst Mayr (2001, pp. 120, 228, 281), chance plays an important role in two steps. First, the production of genetic variation "is almost exclusively a chance phenomena." Secondly, chance plays an important role even in "the process of the elimination of less fit individuals," and particularly during periods of mass extinction.

This element of chance counters the view that the development of new evolutionary designs, including humans, was a progressive, purposeful creation by a Creator God. Rather than the end result, according to the theory of natural selection, human beings were an accident, the end of a long, chance-filled process involving adaptations to local environments. There is no higher purpose, no progressive development, just materialistic forces at work. The observed harmony in the world becomes an artifact of such adaptations of organisms to each other and to the local environment. Such views are squarely at odds with many religious interpretations.

A key point of contention between the worldview is, therefore, the issue of variability—its origin and selection. For a Darwinist, random genetic mutation provides a mechanism of introducing novel variability, and natural selection acts on the variability. For those believing in a creator God, the introduced variability is not random, but directed by the Creator, although natural selection may act on the variability, more in the manner of removing unfit organisms than in any creative role. Some role may also be accorded differential selection, such as mass extinctions. Neither of these worldviews—random variation and the purposeless, non-progressive role of natural selection, or purposeful, progressive variation—are conclusively proved or unproved by scientific methodology, and both are theoretically possible.

There are some scientists who feel that the importance accorded to genes in natural selection may be overstated. According to Jonathan Wells, genetic expression in developing embryos is impacted by morphology as well, such as membranes and cytoskeletal structure. DNA is seen as providing the means for coding of the proteins, but not necessarily the development of the embryo, the instructions of which must reside elsewhere. It is possible that the importance of sexual reproduction and genetic recombination in introducing variability also may be understated.

The history of conflict between Darwinism and religion often has been exacerbated by confusion and dogmatism on both sides. Evolutionary arguments often are set up against the straw man of a dogmatic, biblical fundamentalism in which God created each species separately and the earth is only 6,000 years old. Thus, an either-or dichotomy is created, in which one believes either in the theory of natural selection or an earth only thousands of years old. However, young-earth creationism is only a small subset of the diversity of religious belief, and theistic, teleological explanations of the origin of species may be much more sophisticated and aligned with scientific findings. On the other hand, evolutionary adherents have sometimes presented an equally dogmatic front, refusing to acknowledge well thought out challenges to the theory of natural selection, or allowing for the possibility of alternative, theistic presentations.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Darwin, C. 1859. On the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. London: John Murray, Albemarle Street. Reprinted: Gramercy, 1995.
  • Gould, S. J. 1982. Darwinism and the expansion of evolutionary theory. Science 216:380-387.
  • Gould, S. J. 2002. The Structure of Evolutionary Thought. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
  • Luria, S. E., S. J. Gould, and S. Singer. 1981. A View of Life. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummings.
  • Margulis, L., and D. Sagan. 2002. Acquiring Genomes: A Theory of the Origins of Species. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0465043917.
  • Mayr, E. 1982. The Growth of Biological Thought: Diversity, Evolution, and Inheritance. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
  • Mayr, E. 1991. One Long Argument: Charles Darwin and the Genesis of Modern Evolutionary Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Mayr, E. 2002. What Evolution Is. New York: Basic Books.
  • Wells, J. 2000. Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth? Why Much of What We Teach About Evolution is Wrong. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing.


Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.