Darwinian thinking has been challenged on several occasions, starting with Alfred Russel Wallace, co-discoverer of natural selection. Although he disagreed with some aspects of Charles Darwin’s claims, most of them were ultimately proven wrong. The American botanist Liberty Hyde Bailey published a paper in 1894 considering whether the formulation of neo-Darwinism, the mainstream version of evolution theory, needed expansion (it did not). In the 1980s, paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould pursued a similar line.
Evolutionary biologist Kevin Lala also has reservations about what he calls traditional Darwinian thinking (see “The Extraordinary Ways Species Control Their Evolutionary Destinies”). Some say this is a straw man argument because it calls into question outdated ideas about evolutionary biology. Modern thinking, on the other hand, is broad enough to encompass all the new aspects we are learning in developmental biology, cultural evolution, and symbiosis. Different species live together in close intimacy.
Over the years, the theory of evolution by natural selection has evolved, absorbing new discoveries about genes, DNA, population genetics, and epigenetics that were not possible in Darwin’s time. As reported on page 11, identifying evolutionary drivers is essential, for example, to stay ahead of avian flu outbreaks and to understand how species will adapt to climate change. Whether evolutionary biologists need to add to the rulebook they already have is debatable. When those who point out non-scientific explanations exploit obvious flaws in evolution, they risk allowing the “God of the Gap” argument to creep in.
There is a risk of the ‘God of the Gaps’ argument creeping in due to its obvious shortcomings.
All theories must be challenged, and evaluating modern evolutionary biology brings to the fore many aspects of life that may otherwise be underappreciated. Darwin’s explanations have survived for more than 160 years because they are largely accurate and powerful enough to absorb new discoveries. So the impact of Lala’s approach is not yet clear. But a closer look at this neglected aspect of life is welcome.
subject:
