Arthur S. Lodge's search for a definition of evolution
In his web site Arthur S. Lodge, a respected academic, documents his search for a definition of the Neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution ("NDT", the standard model). Here are his findings:-
___________________________________________________________
I have had
some difficulty in finding out what people mean by the NDT. Norman Macbeth
stated that "About 1930, they put together something that was generally
known as the Synthetic Theory, and that has been the dominant idea ever since,
for fifty years. It is rather strange to say this, but the Synthetic Theory
has never been formulated. It was a vague consensus that was never formulated
in any detail." (Darwinism: A Time for Funerals, Broadside
Edition, Robert Briggs Associates, San Francisco, 1982, p.3)
In the
Preface (p.xiii, last paragraph) to The Evolutionary Synthesis (E. Mayr
& W. B. Provine, Harvard University Press, 2nd Edition, 1998), Ernst Mayr
wrote that "the synthesis is nothing but a confirmation of Darwin's
original theory". I could find no definition of the NDT in this book.
When I asked Will Provine (in 2001) for a definition, he replied that it was
not easy to give a simple definition.
Elsewhere,
Mayr also wrote: "Darwinism is not a simple theory that is either true or
false but is rather a highly complex research program that is continuously
being modified and improved". E. Mayr (1988) Toward a New Philosophy
of Biology (Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge,
Massachusetts), p. 535.
Francisco
Ayala writes: "The modern theory of evolution....is an amalgam of
well-established theories and working hypotheses..." (Proc. Nat. Acad.
Sci. vol. 102, suppl. 1, May 3, 2005, p.6515). I sent an email asking how many
theories and hypotheses are in his amalgam. He replied to my emails, but did
not give me any number in answer to this question.
Douglas
Futuyma (Evolutionary Biology, 3rd edition,1998, pp.26,27;
Sinauer Associates, Sunderland MA) listed 20 items which he said were (a)
"Major Tenets of the Evolutionary Synthesis" and (b) "the
orthodox modern theory of evolution". The list cannot be complete,
however, because it includes no common ancestor postulate.
Michael
Majerus (Melanism: Evolution in Action, Oxford University Press, 1998,
p.78) gives a half-page, unreferenced definition of the NDT that differs from
that given above; it contains no mention of common descent or random,
spontaneous mutation. His NDT is apparently an adjustable theory, for he
states "The Darwinian and neo-Darwinian theories have been amended in
various ways, for specific cases or sets of cases". In an e-mail sent on
May 7, 2002, I asked if it is possible to test the validity of an adjustable
theory; I have not yet received a reply.
Elliott Sober
(The Nature of Selection, University of Chicago Press, 1984, p.22,
paragraph 2) and Philip Kitcher (Abusing Science, MIT Press, Cambridge
MA, 1982, p.18) refer to the modern synthesis and state how it arose but do
not define the NDT.
Mr Pun on a web
site states that "the modern synthetic theory version of the NDT
was not formulated systematically until the publication of Dobzhansky's Genetics
and the Origin of Species" (T. Dobzhansky, 3rd Edition, Columbia
University Press, New York and London, 1951). This book contains a definition
of the "Theory of Evolution" involving 4 and only 4 points with no
mention of random mutation or natural selection (p.11, para.2); this is not.
therefore, a definition of the NDT. Moreover, the book's index contains no
mention of the NDT or any of its synonyms. I think, therefore, that Mr Pun is
mistaken.
The Oxford
English Dictionary and Webster's Dictionary do not define the NDT
or neo-Darwinian.
The 2002 book
Gene
Avatars: the Neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution does not
formulate or define the NDT.
Phillip
Johnson defines his use of the term Darwinism as "fully
naturalistic evolution, involving chance mechanisms guided by natural
selection."
This version of the NDT definition is the result of discussions with my colleague Professor James F. Crow. He considers that this version is a fair representation of evolutionists' current thought
The
Neo-Darwinian Theory: Version 2004
Part 1
All living
organisms on Earth today are descended from inanimate matter.
Part 2
The processes
of descent in Part 1 involved very large, but unknown, numbers of steps,
mostly small.
Part 3
We do not yet
know what steps led to the formation of the first self-replicating entity,
but, from then on, the sole sources of novelty in Part 2 have been random,
spontaneous, heritable, changes in genomes and other hereditary materials.
Part 4
Histories of
descent, following these changes, involved, or depended on, one or more of the
following factors:
The
"Natural Selection List":
natural
selection
genetic drift
Evolution
recombination
population
structure
population
migration
sexual
selection
transposable
elements
horizontal
transmission
neutral
changes
selfish DNA
polyploidy
developmental
constraints
cell
organelles
and any
others (excluding design) that future research might reveal.
Notes
Definition:
Mutation = heritable change in a genome or other hereditary
material
Synonyms:
The Neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution
The
Synthetic Theory of Evolution
The
Evolutionary Synthesis
The above
formulation is incomplete until the term natural selection has been
defined. I can find no agreed definition in the literature (see What
is Natural Selection?). Books (e.g., Endler, Sober) have been
written to answer this question!