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

From: Jim Armstrong (jarmstro@qwest.net)
Date: Fri Sep 26 2003 - 12:52:00 EDT

  • Next message: allenroy: "An interesting case study"

    I have had the same trouble in conversations with folks who use
    "Darwinist" and had a related question. It seems like Darwinism should
    refer to natural selection and survival of the fittest (or better
    adapted) - evolution as Darwin saw it. The other evolution mechanisms
    mentioned below would seem then to be additional "pressures" which
    Darwin did not appreciate at the time, but which have since been found
    to contribute to a larger concept of natural selection and the overall
    ensemble of evolutionary processes.

    But when "Darwinist" is used as a straw man and pejorative, it seems to
    be a catch-all for all evolutionary processes while implying at the same
    time that the whole of the evolutionary picture nonetheless manifests
    all the deficiencies of Darwin's narrower picture. That seems a little
    duplicitous, perhaps akin to ID's "design" and "information" uses which
    embrace fashionably contemporary technology terms, but warp the
    definitions to be something other than what is generally associated with
    the language. JimA

     

    Robert Schneider wrote:

    >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 - 12:52:05 EDT