Heterodoxial evolutionary theories
- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
¿What do you think about? ¿Or what do you kwow about? May be at some level gives new arguments against “social-darwinism” beyond those of Pannehoek. For example, thats of Lynn Margulis, you have here:
‘Theory of symbiotic relationships driving evolution
She later formulated a theory to explain how symbiotic relationships between organisms of often different phyla or kingdoms are the driving force of evolution. Genetic variation is proposed to occur mainly as a result of transfer of nuclear information between bacterial cells or viruses and eukaryotic cells. While her organelle genesis ideas are widely accepted, symbiotic relationships as a current method of introducing genetic variation is something of a fringe idea.
She did however, hold a negative view of certain interpretations of Neo-Darwinism, excessively focused on inter-organismic competition, as she believed that history will ultimately judge them as comprising “a minor twentieth-century religious sect within the sprawling religious persuasion of Anglo-Saxon Biology.”[8] She also believed that proponents of the standard theory “wallow in their zoological, capitalistic, competitive, cost-benefit interpretation of Darwin – having mistaken him… Neo-Darwinism, which insists on [the slow accrual of mutations by gene-level natural selection], is in a complete funk.”[8]
She opposed such competition-oriented views of evolution, stressing the importance of symbiotic or cooperative relationships between species.’
Kropotkin famously proposed a more cooperative model of inter- and intra-species interactions. There is a great book I came across some years ago called Natures’ Economy by Donald Wooster (I think) which delves into the history of ecological ideas in some detail and touches on the matter of holistic interpretations of evolutionary development as I recall
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.