Beatty John
Department of Philosophy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z1, Canada.
J Hist Biol. 2019 Dec;52(4):705-731. doi: 10.1007/s10739-019-09583-4.
This is the second of a two-part essay on the history of debates concerning the creativity of natural selection, from Darwin through the evolutionary synthesis and up to the present. In the first part, I focussed on the mid-late nineteenth century to the early twentieth, with special emphasis on early Darwinism and its critics, the self-styled "mutationists." The second part focuses on the evolutionary synthesis and some of its critics, especially the "neutralists" and "neo-mutationists." Like Stephen Gould, I consider the creativity of natural selection to be a key component of what has traditionally counted as "Darwinism." I argue that the creativity of natural selection is best understood in terms of (1) selection initiating evolutionary change, and (2) selection directing evolutionary change, for example by creating the variation that it subsequently acts upon. I consider the respects in which both of these claims sound non-Darwinian, even though they have long been understood by supporters and critics alike to be virtually constitutive of Darwinism.
这是一篇关于自然选择创造性相关辩论历史的两部分论文中的第二部分,时间跨度从达尔文时代直至进化综合论时期,再到当下。在第一部分中,我聚焦于19世纪中后期至20世纪初,特别强调了早期达尔文主义及其批评者,即自称“突变论者”的观点。第二部分则聚焦于进化综合论及其一些批评者,尤其是“中性论者”和“新突变论者”。和斯蒂芬·杰伊·古尔德一样,我认为自然选择的创造性是传统意义上“达尔文主义”的关键组成部分。我认为,自然选择的创造性最好从以下两个方面来理解:(1)选择引发进化变化;(2)选择引导进化变化,例如通过创造其随后作用的变异。我思考了这两种观点在哪些方面听起来不符合达尔文主义,尽管长期以来支持者和批评者都认为它们实际上是达尔文主义的组成部分。