RE: Darwinian and non-Darwinian (was Re: RFEP & ID)

From: james.behnke@asbury.edu
Date: Fri Sep 26 2003 - 12:47:36 EDT

  • Next message: Jim Armstrong: "Re: Darwinian and non-Darwinian (was Re: RFEP & ID)"

    You are correct. I almost included that in my original post. There was a
    bit of name-calling about who was a believer in "Darwinism." Those who
    emphasized the non-gradualistic mechanisms were harassed about their
    beliefs, and they responded that they really did believe in "Darwinism"
    because of they saw a role for selection in their scenarios.

    Because of these messy definitions, it is important to examine what a person
    means in using the word "Darwinism." Does "Defeating Darwinism" mean that
    you defeat "evolution?" Of course not, but people who are trained in
    twisting meanings take advantage of this confusion.

    Jim Behnke james.behnke@asbury.edu
    Asbury College
    Wilmore, KY 40390 859-858-3511 x 2232

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Robert Schneider [mailto:rjschn39@bellsouth.net]
    Sent: Friday, September 26, 2003 11:55 AM
    To: james.behnke@asbury.edu; asa@lists.calvin.edu
    Subject: Darwinian and non-Darwinian (was Re: RFEP & ID)

    Jim writes:

    > Generally, when we describe someone as a "Darwinian," we are saying that
    > they believe that gradualism and selection are the important features in
    an
    > evolutionary process. It seems that ecologists tend to be hard-core
    > Darwinian.
    >
    > Non-Darwinian biologists view drift, founder effects, macromutations
    (those
    > with multiple effects) and similar processes as the important mechanisms
    in
    > an evolutionary pathway. S.J. Gould popularized this in the punctuated
    > equilibrium model.
    >
    > Jim Behnke james.behnke@asbury.edu
    > Asbury College
    > Wilmore, KY 40390 859-858-3511 x 2232
    >

    Thanks, Jim. I'm grateful for this statement. But a query. Do not such
    phenomena as gene flow, genetic drift, founder effect, etc., still depend in
    some way on selection, as in the establishment of a new population in a new
    environment (e.g., migration to an island), even though the rate of
    evolutionary change may be much more than gradual? Help me out in
    understanding and clarifying this point.

    Thanks,
    Bob Schneider
    (Berea College ex-patriate now in Boone, NC)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 26 2003 - 12:46:54 EDT