Darwin’s two hundred years: is not time for a change?

Armando Aranda-Anzaldo

Resumen


Two hundred years after Darwin’s birth, the evolution of living systems is an accepted fact but there is scope for controversy on the mechanisms involved in such a process. Mainstream neo-Darwinism champions the role of natural selection (NS) as the fundamental cause of the evolutionary process as well as of random, contingent events at the genetic level as the main source of variation upon which NS performs its causal role. Thus, according to neo-Darwinism the course of biological evolution is quite unpredictable and the past can only be partially reconstructed by means of a historical narrative. This second-class status for biology within the natural sciences as a merely descriptive, historical science results from the chronic neglect of biological form in the neo-Darwinian discourse. Hereunder I discuss the need for reintroducing form as the central object of biology, aiming at the identification of the general and fundamental principles of biological form. Such a formal biology may go beyond simple historical description achieving a complete, rational explanation of how previous and current morphologies corresponding to identifiable species were established, and so providing a rational foundation for predicting the possible outcomes of future biological evolution on earth and perhaps elsewhere in the universe.

 Key words. Neo-Darwinism, natural selection, form, constraint, history, contingency, necessity, possible, morphology, nomothetic, systematic.


Texto completo:

PDF

Referencias


Darlington, P.J. (1983), “Evolution: questions for the modern theory,” ñProc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 80: 1960-1963.

Nei, M. (2005), “Selectionism and neutralism in molecular evolution,” Mol. Biol. Evol. 22: 2318-2342.

Mayr, E. (1963), Animal Species and Evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.

Aranda-Anzaldo, A. (1997), “The gene as the unit of selection: a case of evolutive delusion,” Ludus Vitalis V(9): 91-120.

Pagel, M. (2009), “Natural selection 150 years on,” Nature 457: 808-811.

Harner, M. (1977), “The ecological basis for Aztec sacrifice,” Am. Ethnologist 4: 117-135.

Wilson, E.O. (1978), On Human Nature. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

MA.

Gould, S.J. & Lewontin, R.C. (1979), “The spandrels of San Marco and thePanglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme,” Proc. R. Soc. London B. 205: 581-598.Dobzhansky, T., Ayala, F.J., Stebbins, G.L. & Valentine, J.W. (1977), Evolution. W.H.Freeman, San Francisco, pp. 186-188.

Reznick, D.N. & Ricklefs, R.E. (2009), “Darwin’s bridge between microevolution and macroevolution,” Nature 457: 837-842.

Jacob, F. (1977), “Evolution and tinkering,” Science 196: 1161-1166.

Dobzhansky, T. (1973), “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the lightof evolution,” Amer. Biol. Teacher 35: 125-129.

Lipton, P. (2005), “The truth about science,” Phil. Trans. R. Soc. 360: 1259-1269.

Rosenberg, A. (1985), The Structure of Biological Science. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, U.K.

The chimpanzee genome sequencing and analysis consortium (2005), “Initialsequence of the chimpanzee genome and comparison with the human genome,” Nature 437: 69-87.

Aranda-Anzaldo, A. (2000), “The Hox-gene research programme and theshortcomings of molecular preformationism,” Riv. Biol. 93: 57-81.

Szymanski, M. & Barciszewski, J. (2002), “Beyond the proteome: non-codingregulatory RNAs,” Genome Biol. 3: 0005.1 – 0005.8.

Hou, J., Sims, G.E., Zhang, C., & Kim, S.H. (2003), “A global representation ofthe protein fold space,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100: 2386- 2390.

Alberts, B. (1998), “The cell as a collection of protein machines: preparing thenext generation of molecular biologists,” Cell 92: 291-294.

Driesch, H. (1908), The Science and Philosophy of the Organism. London: Black.

Webster, G. & Goodwin, B.C. (1996), Form and Transformation: Generative and Relational Principles in Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Aranda-Anzaldo, A. (2007), “Back to the future: Aristotle and molecular biology,” Ludus Vitalis XV(28): 195-198.

Thompson, D.W. (1942), On Growth And Form. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, UK.

Thom, R. (1990), Semiophysics: A Sketch. Redwood City, Menlo-Park: AddisonWesley.

Goodwin, B.C. (1994), How the Leopard Changed its Spots: The Evolution of Complexity. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

Minelli, A. (2003), The Development of Animal Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Aranda Anzaldo, A. (2002), “Towards a morphogenetic perspective on cancer,” Riv. Biol. 95: 35-51.

Gotthelf 1999, Darwin on Aristotle, J. Hist. Biol. 32: 3-30.

“Charles Darwin: a sketch,” in Asa Grey: Darwiniana, ed. A. Hunter Dupree, Harvard University Press, 1963, Cambridge MA, p. 237.

Lennox, J.G., 1993, “Darwin was a teleologist,” Biol. Philos. 8: 409-421.


Enlaces refback

  • No hay ningún enlace refback.


Revista semestral editada por el Centro de Estudios Filosóficos, Políticos
y Sociales Vicente Lombardo Toledano de la Secretaría de Educación Pública,
la Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana-Iztapalapa y Edicions UIB de la Universitat de les Illes Balears.

Lombardo Toledano 51, Col. Ex-Hda. Guadalupe Chimalistac,
Del. Alvaro Obregón, C.P. 01050, México, D.F.
Tels. (5255) 5661-4679 y 5661-4987
Fax: (5255) 5661-1787