Search Results for: Extended evolutionary synthesis

Once again: misguided calls for a thorough revamping of evolutionary biology

On November 7-9 there was a special meeting of London’s Royal Society on “New Trends in Evolutionary Biology: Biological, Philosophical, and Social Science Perspectives.” I believe it was organized by Denis Noble, a physiologist who believes that modern views about evolution are ripe for a thorough revision.  Many of the speakers at the meeting are part of the … Continue reading Once again: misguided calls for a thorough revamping of evolutionary biology

David Sloan Wilson: There is a god, and it’s the “superorganism” of insect colonies and group-selected humans

David Sloan Wilson is known as an ardent promoter of group selection, the evolutionary idea that the unit of selection is not the gene or individual, but groups of individuals whose differential extinction and reproduction (group “splitting”) can give rise to traits that are maladaptive within groups, like purely altruistic behavior. (E. O. Wilson, not … Continue reading David Sloan Wilson: There is a god, and it’s the “superorganism” of insect colonies and group-selected humans

Niche construction: does it represent a “vastly neglected phenomenon” in evolutionary thought?

“Niche construction” is a new term in evolutionary biology—indeed, a buzzword—although the idea has been around under other rubrics for years. It is the idea that the niche of an organism is not something static, imposed by its environment, but that the organism, as it evolves in behavior, morphology, and physiology, can change its environment … Continue reading Niche construction: does it represent a “vastly neglected phenomenon” in evolutionary thought?

Science magazine’s piece on the Giant Templeton Evolution Grant, and my response

About two weeks ago I was interviewed by Elizabeth Pennisi, a reporter for Science magazine, about the big grant (about $8 million, it seems—I was apparently wrong in claiming $11 million in my previous article) that the John Templeton Foundation gave to a group of researchers to “rethink” the modern theory of evolution and come … Continue reading Science magazine’s piece on the Giant Templeton Evolution Grant, and my response

Templeton wastes $11 million in attempt to change evolutionary biology

For some time, a group of biologists have been promoting the idea that the Modern Synthetic Theory of Evolution (which they call “Standard Evolutionary Theory,” or SET) is incomplete in major ways, and needs a reboot. Their main contention is that the SET is too “gene-centric”, and ignores environmental factors—like non-genetic developmental plasticity, epigenetic modification,  and ‘niche … Continue reading Templeton wastes $11 million in attempt to change evolutionary biology

Are we ready for an “extended evolutionary synthesis”?

Over at Time magazine, Carl Zimmer has a good essay, “The Ever Evolving Theories of Darwin”, about Darwin’s contributions and what has happened in evolutionary biology since 1859. The essay was kind of spoiled for me, though, by the ending, in which Zimmer seems to buy into something he calls the “extended evolutionary synthesis”. To … Continue reading Are we ready for an “extended evolutionary synthesis”?

Darwin proclaimed wrong AGAIN; we fight back!

The January 24th issue of New Scientist had a garish cover showing the tree of life, with the words “DARWIN WAS WRONG” emblazoned over it.   An editorial bemoaned the phylogenetic errors of the old man, adding a few other buzzwords as well: A particularly pertinent example is provided in this week’s cover story – the … Continue reading Darwin proclaimed wrong AGAIN; we fight back!

Pigliucci pwns Fodor and Piattelli-Palmarini

In this week’s Nature, philosopher/biologist Massimo Pigliucci reviews What Darwin Got Wrong, the book-length attack on natural selection penned by Jerry Fodor and (the unrelated) Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini: By misusing philosophical distinctions and misinterpreting the literature on natural selection, Fodor and Piattelli-Palmarini make a mess of what could have been an important contribution. The authors are … Continue reading Pigliucci pwns Fodor and Piattelli-Palmarini