To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Views of Darwin's theory of evolution.
Journal articles on the topic 'Views of Darwin's theory of evolution'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Views of Darwin's theory of evolution.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Agai, J. M. "A Reflection on the legacies of Charles Darwin." Theologia Viatorum 41, no. 1 (June 30, 2017): 23–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/tv.v41i1.18.
Full textAbstract:
The biological theory of human evolution existed before Charles Darwin. His view on the origins of animals attracted much debate among scientists and Chris-tians since 1859. Darwin’s view on the causes of variation among species which led to the emergence of humans has contributed to the development of an ideology according to which he is the father of evolution. This research is a historical reflection on Darwin’s life and his theory of evolution. The author describes the views that existed and still exist as responses to Darwin's life and his theory of evolution. The research is aimed at appreciating Darwin’s legacies and his contribution to the development of the various schools of thoughts among Christians regarding the creation/evolution debate.
2
Ragan, Mark A. "Darwin's Pictures: Views of Evolutionary Theory, 1837-1874." Systematic Biology 60, no. 3 (February 9, 2011): 388–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syr001.
Full text
3
Marciano, Alain, and Maud Pelissier. "The Influence of Scottish Enlightenment on Darwin's Theory of Cultural Evolution." Journal of the History of Economic Thought 22, no. 2 (June 2000): 239–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10427710050025439.
Full textAbstract:
Since the 1980s, institutional change has become a matter of great interest as economists faced the necessity and the challenge to provide a theory of economic or cultural evolution. Their first reaction was to refer to biology, a field in which theories of evolution have reached a high degree of sophistication. This was all the more legitimate and relevant given that biology has been largely influenced by economics (Schweber 1977, 1980; Gordon 1991; Kresge and Wenar 1994; Depew and Weber 1995). Indeed, the influence of classical political economy on the views of one of the fathers of the modern theory of evolution, Charles Darwin, is widely admitted. Darwin borrowed from economists fundamental ideas such as spontaneous order and methodological individualism (from Adam Smith), the positive role of diversity and variety (from Charles Babbage) and the concept of the struggle for life (from Thomas Malthus). Therefore, the ideas promoted by the founding fathers of political economy, sometimes called “Darwinians before Darwin” (Hayek 1973, p. 23), have shaped Darwin's theory of biological evolution.
4
Bellon, Richard. "“The great question in agitation”: George Bentham and the origin of species." Archives of Natural History 30, no. 2 (October 2003): 282–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/anh.2003.30.2.282.
Full textAbstract:
George Bentham initially expressed reservations about Darwin's Origin of species (1859). What most troubled Bentham was the potentially disruptive nature of Darwin's ideas for natural history. Bentham, renowned even among other naturalists for always proceeding with the utmost intellectual caution, decided to ignore Darwin's theory. This reticence disappointed Darwin, who pressured Bentham unsuccessfully to give an assessment of the Origin. Bentham did, however, publicly praise Darwin's work on the fertilisation of orchids as an ideal model for natural history research. Finally, in his 1863 presidential address to the Linnean Society, Bentham directly addressed “the great question in agitation”, evolution. His judicious praise of the Origin would, Darwin was convinced, “do more to shake the unshaken & bring on those leaning to our side, than anything written directly in favour of transmutation.” Bentham's tentative conversion to evolution came only after Darwin's work, particularly on orchids, convinced him that evolution would add “stability” to systematic work. As a result, evolution's influence on systematic botany was largely conservative. It validated, rather than challenged, the method, systems, world view and intellectual authority of established experts like Bentham.
5
Hodge, M. J. S. "Generation and the Origin of Species (1837–1937): A Historiographical Suggestion." British Journal for the History of Science 22, no. 3 (September 1989): 267–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0007087400026157.
Full textAbstract:
Bernard Norton's friends in the history of science have had many reasons for commemorating, with admiration and affection, not only his research and teaching but no less his conversation and his company. One of his most estimable traits was his refusal to beat about the bush in raising the questions he thought worthwhile pursuing. I still remember discoursing at Pittsburgh on Darwin's route to his theory of natural selection, and being asked at the end by Bernard what were Darwin's views on heredity. I answered with the conventional waffle to the effect that the theory concerned the populational fate rather than the individual production and transmission of heritable variation, so that whatever views Darwin had on heredity had only a subsidiary place in his theorizing. Bernard was not fooled. ‘I would have thought’, he said, ‘that in order to understand anyone's theorising about evolution it would be necessary to look at his views on heredity’.
6
Van Den Berg, Hugo A. "Darwin Endures, Despite Disparagement." Science Progress 101, no. 1 (March 2018): 32–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.3184/003685018x15166188312386.
Full textAbstract:
Evolution lies at the heart of the life sciences, and Charles Darwin is a towering historical figure within evolutionary science. One testimony to his lasting influence is that declaring Darwin to have been wrong all along remains a provocative way to command attention. The present paper discusses various strands of ‘Darwin was wrong’ partisans and their divergent views and motives: some are looking to Darwin to justify or condemn the political ideologies that they support or reject; others are concerned with the corrupting influence that the bleak cosmic outlook of evolution is deemed to exert on the moral or religious rectitude of impressionable minds, or regard Darwinism as a direct assault on religion; philosophers question the very coherence of the entire enterprise; and certain biologists aspire to go down in history as even greater than Darwin. It is sobering to reflect that this diverse group is united only by their poor grasp of Darwin's theory of natural selection.
7
Caudill, Ed. "A Content Analysis of Press Views of Darwin's Evolution Theory, 1860–1925." Journalism Quarterly 64, no. 4 (December 1987): 782–946. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/107769908706400415.
Full text
8
Grafen, Alan. "Formalizing Darwinism and inclusive fitness theory." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 364, no. 1533 (November 12, 2009): 3135–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0056.
Full textAbstract:
Inclusive fitness maximization is a basic building block for biological contributions to any theory of the evolution of society. There is a view in mathematical population genetics that nothing is caused to be maximized in the process of natural selection, but this is explained as arising from a misunderstanding about the meaning of fitness maximization. Current theoretical work on inclusive fitness is discussed, with emphasis on the author's ‘formal Darwinism project’. Generally, favourable conclusions are drawn about the validity of assuming fitness maximization, but the need for continuing work is emphasized, along with the possibility that substantive exceptions may be uncovered. The formal Darwinism project aims more ambitiously to represent in a formal mathematical framework the central point of Darwin's Origin of Species , that the mechanical processes of inheritance and reproduction can give rise to the appearance of design, and it is a fitting ambition in Darwin's bicentenary year to capture his most profound discovery in the lingua franca of science.
9
Gruenwald, Oskar. "Progress in Science." Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies 22, no. 1 (2010): 1–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/jis2010221/21.
Full textAbstract:
A new paradigm is emerging which places Charles Darwin's theory of evolution via natural selection into a larger conceptual framework with greater explanatory power. Darwinism needs to be reconceptualized as a scientific enterprise and philosophical worldview. A larger framework is needed to account for the immaterial laws of nature which guide evolutionary mechanisms and processes to achieve predetermined ends that reflect a superlative Intelligence, Mind or God. Curiously, Darwinism fails to explain intelligent observers who can make sense of the laws of nature. Immanuel Kant's conception of man as both phenomenon and noumenon suggests that man is the missing link between science and religion, and that the two views of genesis—-evolution and creation--are complementary rather than antithetical. Evolution should be taught as science, not ideology. Teaching evolution as science means opening the theory to critical scrutiny which can correct, modify, enrich, and develop the theory in interdisciplinary perspective. But the theory of evolution reaches well beyond science narrowly defined, and broaches philosophical, ethical, and theological dimensions which can be addressed only in interdisciplinary conversation bringing to the table insights from many disciplines. Finally, Darwinism as a materialist, reductionist worldview needs to be humanized, if not Christianized, and thus reach its full potential as science. It would then also recognize human exceptionalism, the teleological imperative, the principle of tolerance, and the fundamental religious insight that we live by faith.
10
Vorachek, Laura. "MESMERISTS AND OTHER MEDDLERS: SOCIAL DARWINISM, DEGENERATION, AND EUGENICS IN TRILBY." Victorian Literature and Culture 37, no. 1 (March 2009): 197–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1060150309090123.
Full textAbstract:
About two-thirds of the way through George Du Maurier's Trilby (1894), a novel that entranced the reading public with its descriptions of Bohemian Paris and mesmerism, there is a seventeen-page digression on The Origin of Species. This rumination is sparked by the fact that Little Billee is “reading Mr. Darwin's immortal book for the third time” while he contemplates proposing to the parson's daughter, Alice (180; pt. 5). Ultimately, he cannot bring himself to do so because Alice believes, among other Bible stories, that “[t]he world was made in six days. It is just six thousand years old,” a view debunked in The Origin by Darwin's depiction of the gradual evolution of species over vast periods of time (174; pt. 5). While the controversy elicited in the second half of the nineteenth century by Darwin's theory of natural selection continues today, the question remains: what is this debate doing in a novel about expatriate artists and the woman they love? I read this seeming digression from the sentimental and sensational plot of the novel as a cue to the importance of Darwinian ideas to reading Trilby. In this article, I trace Du Maurier's engagement in Trilby and in his cartoons with various permutations of Social Darwinism, notably degeneration (especially its relationship to class), society's moral and cultural evolution, and eugenics. I argue that the novelist negotiates between Darwin and his interpreters as he resists collectivism, or state intervention in questions of social welfare, in favor of individual liberty in matters of sexual selection.
11
Ambrose, C. T. "Darwin's historical sketch – an American predecessor: C. S. Rafinesque." Archives of Natural History 37, no. 2 (October 2010): 191–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/anh.2010.0002.
Full textAbstract:
When early reviewers of Darwin's On the origin of species chided him for neglecting to mention predecessors to his theory of evolution, he added an “historical sketch” in later editions. Among the predecessors he cited was a French émigré to America named Constantine Samuel Rafinesque, who in the mid-1830s had written about the emergence of new species at a time when most naturalists (including Darwin initially) accepted the biblical story of creation and assumed the immutability of species. Rafinesque discovered and named thousands of new plants and animals in his American travels and flooded the taxonomic literature with reports, which seemed incomplete, confusing, and excessive to other naturalists. He alienated many who later dismissed his findings and excluded them from the biological literature. Soon after Rafinesque's death in 1840, Asa Gray, the young American botanist, wrote a damning critique of his work and suggested it be ignored. How Darwin learned of Rafinesque and his views on species is the focus of this essay, which also mentions briefly the two other American naturalists cited by Darwin in his sketch. Gray seems the likely informant through his correspondence with Darwin or his close associates.
12
Bromham, Lindell. "Darwin would have loved DNA: celebrating Darwin 200." Biology Letters 5, no. 4 (May 15, 2009): 503–5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2009.0298.
Full textAbstract:
Analysis of DNA sequences now plays a key role in evolutionary biology research. If Darwin were to come back today, I think he would be absolutely delighted with molecular evolutionary genetics, for three reasons. First, it solved one of the greatest problems for his theory of evolution by natural selection. Second, it gives us a tool that can be used to investigate many of the questions he found the most fascinating. And third, DNA data confirm Darwin's grand view of evolution.
13
Sanchez, Luis Manuel. "Darwin’s politics of selection." Politics and the Life Sciences 38, no. 1 (2019): 72–102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/pls.2019.1.
Full textAbstract:
The uses of natural selection argument in politics have been constant since Charles Darwin’s times. They have also been varied. The readings of Darwin’s theory range from the most radically individualist views, as in orthodox socio-Darwinism, to the most communitarian, as in Peter Kropotkin’s and other socialist perspectives. This essay argues that such diverse, contradictory, and sometimes even outrageous political derivations from Darwin’s theory may be partially explained by some incompleteness and ambivalences underlying Darwin’s concepts. “Natural selection,” “struggle for existence,” and “survival of the fittest” are open concepts and may suggest some hierarchical and segregationist interpretations. Circumstantially, Darwin accepted social “checks,” such as discouraging marriage of “lower” individuals to prevent them from reproducing, in a vein of Malthusian politics. This makes Darwin’s theory of selection by struggle collide with his theory of social instincts, by which he explains the origins of morality. It also favors reading Darwin’sOn the Origin of SpeciesorThe Descent of Manfrom opposite, mostly ideological perspectives. Darwin’s position is ambivalent, although hardly unreasonable. The recognition he makes of social instincts, as well as the use of the concept of artificial selection, entails accepting the role of human consciousness, by which social evolution cannot be reduced to natural evolution, as socio-Darwinians did next and as some neo-Darwinists seem to repeat. On these grounds, this essay argues the inadequacy of the conventional model of natural selection for understanding politics. If we want to describe politics in Darwin’s language,artificialrather thannatural selectionwould be the concept that performs better for explaining the courses of politics in real society.
14
Djuric, Drago. "Moral sense by Charles Darwin." Theoria, Beograd 52, no. 3 (2009): 49–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/theo0903049d.
Full textAbstract:
At the beginning of this paper Darwin's approach to science will be presented. This will be illustrated with his own modality of his main claims and modesty he had shown in evaluating the worth of his theory. Than we shall present his four suppositions important for preservation and evolution of moral sense. After that we will consider the issue of relation between inherited and acquired moral properties and main characteristics which according to Darwin, make difference between social instinct in lower animals and moral sense in man. At the end some we shall present some arguments for thesis that in evolutionary scientific approach to ethics there is no room for unbridgeable gap between facts and values, 'ought' and 'is', and some arguments for thesis that from the point of view of the theory of evolution we can have descriptive ethics, but not any prescriptive or normative ethics except predictions that some moral beliefs and behaviors can be evolutionary successful.
15
Langton, Daniel R. "Elijah Benamozegh and Evolutionary Theory: A Nineteenth-Century Italian Kabbalist’s Panentheistic Response to Darwin." European Journal of Jewish Studies 10, no. 2 (August 16, 2016): 223–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1872471x-12341293.
Full textAbstract:
The Italian rabbi and philosopher Elijah Benamozegh (1823–1900) engaged widely with non-Jewish European culture, especially with regard to theology, philosophy and science. With respect to evolutionary theory, his views went through three stages. These stages correspond to his engagement with ideas of transmutation in three key works, namely, the Hebrew biblical commentary ʾEm la-miqraʾ (1862–1865), the Italian theological treatise Teologia dogmatica e apologetica (1877), and his posthumous great work in French, Israël et l’humanité (1914). Over time, Benamozegh came to view Darwin’s account of the common descent of all life as evidence in support of kabbalistic teachings, which he synthesized to offer a majestic vision of cosmic evolution, with radical implications for understanding the development of morality and religion itself. In the context of the creation-evolution debate in Europe, Benamozegh’s significance is as the earliest Orthodox Jewish proponent of a panentheistic account of evolution.
16
Purdy, Jesse E., Arthur Harriman, and Joseph Molitorisz. "Contributions to the History of Psychology: XCV. Possible Relations between Theories of Evolution and Animal Learning." Psychological Reports 73, no. 1 (August 1993): 211–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1993.73.1.211.
Full textAbstract:
It is proposed that the dominance of continuity learning theory as set against noncontinuity learning theory during the middle third of the 20th century rested importantly on its derivation from Darwin's theory of evolution. The kinship is shown in several ways. First, Thorndike and Hull echoed the principle of natural selection in their belief that behaviors underwent gradual modification because acts that were attended steadily by favorable consequences tended to occur with increasing frequency. Second, they denied both nonphysical explanations of behavior and a priori purposes which might guide that behavior. Third, the laws of learning were said to hold for all organisms. It is argued that the continuity approach may have enjoyed success because it was consistent with the Darwinian world view. Had punctualist, rather than gradualist, explanations of evolution come to the fore in the late 19th century, learning theories might have proceeded quite differently with the dominance of noncontinuity approaches.
17
Britton, Barrie. "Evolution by Blind Chance." Scottish Journal of Theology 39, no. 3 (August 1986): 341–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s003693060003088x.
Full textAbstract:
Ever since Charles Darwin first published his revolutionary book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, there has been considerable disagreement among Christians concerning both the truth of evolutionary theory and its possible reconciliation with the Bible. Some Christians have taken the so-called ‘fundamentalist creationist’ position believing in a literal interpretation of the first few chapters of Genesis. Others have adopted so-called ‘theistic evolutionist’ views accepting to various different degrees Darwinian ideas about origins. One point however on which most Christians (and indeed non-Christians) are agreed, is that an evolutionary process based on blind chance must necessarily conflict with all possible theistic world views and stands irreconcilable with the biblical text. It is this assertion which in this essay I hope to refute, as based on misunderstanding of the meaning of blind chance, of the mechanism of evolution and of the involvement of God in the universe.
18
Jayasuriya, K. M. G. Gehan, Yasoja S. Athugala, Malaka M. Wijayasinghe, Jerry M. Baskin, Carol C. Baskin, and Niranjan Mahadevan. "The crypsis hypothesis: a stenopic view of the selective factors in the evolution of physical dormancy in seeds." Seed Science Research 25, no. 2 (March 27, 2015): 127–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0960258515000124.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractPhysical dormancy (PY) in seeds/fruits, which is caused by the water-impermeable palisade layer, has long been considered a mechanism for synchronizing germination to a favourable time for seedling survival and establishment. Recently, a new hypothesis (crypsis hypothesis) was proposed as the main selective factor for the evolution of PY. However, there are some misconceptions in this hypothesis. Our objective is to critically evaluate the crypsis hypothesis and to point out that there are multiple adaptive roles of PY. The fundamental argument in the crypsis hypothesis, that PY evolved as an escape mechanism from predators, is not valid according to the evolutionary theory of Darwin. According to Darwin's hypothesis, variations (dormancy in our case) within a population occur randomly, i.e. there is no direct function of a variation at the time of its origin. Different selection pressures operating in the environment increase or decrease the fitness of individuals with the variation. Water-gap anatomy in seeds/fruits and phylogenetic relationships of species with PY suggest that PY has evolved several times in angiosperms. Thus, we argue that not only predatory pressure but also several other environmental pressures (e.g. proper timing of germination, ultra-drying of seeds, dispersal and pathogens) were involved in increasing the fitness of species producing seeds with PY. The significance of PY in the survival of the species under the above-mentioned environmental pressures and other misconceptions of the crypsis hypothesis are discussed in detail.
19
Faye, Jan. "Darwinism in disguise? A comparison between Bohr's view on quantum mechanics and QBism." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 374, no. 2068 (May 28, 2016): 20150236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2015.0236.
Full textAbstract:
The Copenhagen interpretation is first and foremost associated with Niels Bohr's philosophy of quantum mechanics. In this paper, I attempt to lay out what I see as Bohr's pragmatic approach to science in general and to quantum physics in particular. A part of this approach is his claim that the classical concepts are indispensable for our understanding of all physical phenomena, and it seems as if the claim is grounded in his reflection upon how the evolution of language is adapted to experience. Another, recent interpretation, QBism, has also found support in Darwin's theory. It may therefore not be surprising that sometimes QBism is said to be of the same breed as the Copenhagen interpretation. By comparing the two interpretations, I conclude, nevertheless, that there are important differences.
20
Lyon, Bruce E., and Robert Montgomerie. "Sexual selection is a form of social selection." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 367, no. 1600 (August 19, 2012): 2266–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0012.
Full textAbstract:
Social selection influences the evolution of weapons, ornaments and behaviour in both males and females. Thus, social interactions in both sexual and non-sexual contexts can have a powerful influence on the evolution of traits that would otherwise appear to be detrimental to survival. Although clearly outlined by West-Eberhard in the early 1980s, the idea that social selection is a comprehensive framework for the study of ornaments and weapons has largely been ignored. In West-Eberhard's view, sexual selection is a form of social selection—a concept supported by several lines of evidence. Darwin's distinction between natural and sexual selection has been useful, but recent confusion about the limits of sexual selection suggests that some traits are not easily categorized as naturally or sexually selected. Because social selection theory has much to offer the current debates about both sexual selection and reproductive competition in females, it is sometimes viewed, narrowly, to be most useful when considering female roles. However, social selection theory encompasses much more than female reproductive competition. Our goal here was to provide that broader perspective.
21
Campagna, Leonardo, Pilar Benites, Stephen C. Lougheed, Darío A. Lijtmaer, Adrián S. Di Giacomo, Muir D. Eaton, and Pablo L. Tubaro. "Rapid phenotypic evolution during incipient speciation in a continental avian radiation." Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 279, no. 1734 (November 30, 2011): 1847–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.2170.
Full textAbstract:
Adaptive radiations have helped shape how we view animal speciation, particularly classic examples such as Darwin's finches, Hawaiian fruitflies and African Great Lakes cichlids. These ‘island’ radiations are comparatively recent, making them particularly interesting because the mechanisms that caused diversification are still in motion. Here, we identify a new case of a recent bird radiation within a continentally distributed species group; the capuchino seedeaters comprise 11 Sporophila species originally described on the basis of differences in plumage colour and pattern in adult males. We use molecular data together with analyses of male plumage and vocalizations to understand species limits of the group. We find marked phenotypic variation despite lack of mitochondrial DNA monophyly and few differences in other putatively neutral nuclear markers. This finding is consistent with the group having undergone a recent radiation beginning in the Pleistocene, leaving genetic signatures of incomplete lineage sorting, introgressive hybridization and demographic expansions. We argue that this apparent uncoupling between neutral DNA homogeneity and phenotypic diversity is expected for a recent group within the framework of coalescent theory. Finally, we discuss how the ecology of open habitats in South America during the Pleistocene could have helped promote this unique and ongoing radiation.
22
Rubenstein, Dustin R. "Sexual and social competition: broadening perspectives by defining female roles." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 367, no. 1600 (August 19, 2012): 2248–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0278.
Full textAbstract:
Males figured more prominently than females in Darwin's view of sexual selection. He considered female choice of secondary importance to male–male competition as a mechanism to explain the evolution of male ornaments and armaments. Fisher later demonstrated the importance of female choice in driving male trait evolution, but his ideas were largely ignored for decades. As sexual selection came to embrace the notions of parent–offspring and sexual conflict, and experimental tests of female choice showed promise, females began to feature more prominently in the framework of sexual selection theory. Recent debate over this theory has centred around the role of females, not only over the question of choice, but also over female–female competition. Whereas some have called for expanding the sexual selection framework to encompass all forms of female–female competition, others have called for subsuming sexual selection within a broader framework of social selection, or replacing it altogether. Still others have argued for linking sexual selection more clearly to other evolutionary theories such as kin selection. Rather than simply debating terminology, we must take a broader view of the general processes that lead to trait evolution in both sexes by clearly defining the roles that females play in the process, and by focusing on intra- and inter-sexual interactions in males and females.
23
Preece, Rod. "Thoughts out of Season on the History of Animal Ethics." Society & Animals 15, no. 4 (2007): 365–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156853007x235537.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractContrary to conventional wisdom, the earlier Western tradition did not customarily deny souls per se to nonhuman animals; when it denied immortal souls to animals, it sometimes deemed that denial a reason for giving greater consideration to animals in their earthly existence. Nor has the Western tradition uniformly deemed animals intended for human use. Further, there was considerable opposition to the Cartesian view of animals as insentient machines, and—even among those who were convinced—it was not unknown for them to deem it inappropriate to rely on that conviction in the treatment of animals. Moreover, Darwin's (1874) theory of evolution had neither a novel nor a positive impact on the way in which animals were to be regarded and treated. The study of the history of animal ethics needs to be rethought in a far more nuanced manner.
24
Artemieva, Elena. "Modern evolutionism and the views of A. A. Lyubishchev on the problem of species." Novitates Theriologicae, no. 12 (June 16, 2021): 371–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.53452/nt1261.
Full textAbstract:
With the advent of Darwinism, historical, functional, and adaptive approaches began to dominate in the theory of form. According to A. A. Lyubishchev: «Historical morphology devoured constructive». The tasks of morphology and taxonomy are closely related. Both disciplines should strive to identify the laws governing the diversity of the organic world. The nomogenetic component of evolution, the laws underlying the system, are reflected in morphology. And vice versa, the similarity of organs of different origins, facts of incomplete homology, pre-adaptation of forms, a huge number of parallelisms and many other morphological factors prove not only the existence of laws of form, but also the nomogenetic component of evolution. Despite the heterogeneity and exceptional complexity in the structure of organisms, there is a recurrence of similar forms that penetrates the entire systematics, suggesting that the forms of organisms are not epiphenomenons of a complex structure. An excellent example of regular variability is the Law of homologous series of hereditary variability by N. I. Vavilov: «knowing what mutational changes occur in individuals of any species, one can foresee that the same mutations in similar conditions will arise in related species and genera.» For A. A. Lyubishchev, the main components of evolution were: 1) tychogenetic (evolution based on random, unforeseen mutations); 2) nomogenetic (the presence of firm laws of development and limited form formation); 3) ectogenetic (factors external to organisms); and 4) telogenetic (active adaptation of organisms). At present, the study of architectonics and promorphology is coming to the fore, i.e. symmetry of organisms.
25
Lernout, Geert. "Who Wrote What When: The Bible, Science and Criticism." European Review 20, no. 3 (May 2, 2012): 301–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1062798711000561.
Full textAbstract:
According to the traditional (or ‘whig’) interpretation of history, sometime in the seventeenth century science was born in the form that we know today, in a new spirit that can best be summed up by the motto of the Royal Society: nullius in verba, take nobody's word for it. In the next few centuries this new critical way of looking at reality was instrumental in the creation of a coherent view of the world, and of that world's history, which was found to be increasingly at odds with traditional claims, most famously in the case of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. By the end of the nineteenth century, the divide between science and religion was described by means of words such as ‘conflict’ and ‘warfare,’ the terms used by John William Draper and Andrew Dickson White in the titles of their respective books: History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874) and History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896).
26
Petronić, Đorđe, and Igor Vujović. "Cognitive niche." Биомедицинска истраживања 11, no. 1 (2020): 64–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.5937/bii2001064p.
Full textAbstract:
In a joint publication with Alfred Russell Wallace, Charles Darwin presented the theory which stated that all life forms were developed by natural selection in which the fight for survival had the effect similar to artificial intelligence applied to selective breeding. Despite a coincidence of views concerning the origin of life, these two scientists had their disagreements. Wallace argued that intelligence could have never arisen through the process of natural adaptation, but rather as a consequence of intelligent design. On the other hand, Darwin insisted that human intelligence could only be explained by the theory of evolution. This difference in point of views on the matter is a manifestation of the difference in the efforts to answer the question: "Why are people so intelligent?" In this context, the main aim of the study is to present a literature review concerning evolutionary psychology and to provide an explanation of the evolution of human intelligence. In other words, the study seeks to explain why people are able to accomplish such intellectual exploits as the ones found in mathematics, science, philosophy, law, etc., bearing in mind that such abilities or talents cannot be found in the original human habitat. The results have showed that evolutionary psychologists consider humans to be so intelligent due to the fact that they have evolved to fill the "cognitive niche". The cognitive niche is a survival mode characterized by managing the environment through mediating cognition and social cooperation.
27
Ja’far, Suhermanto. "Evolusi Embrionik Manusia dalam al-Qur’an." MUTAWATIR 3, no. 1 (September 9, 2015): 25. http://dx.doi.org/10.15642/mutawatir.2013.3.1.25-45.
Full textAbstract:
This article attempts to reread passages of the Koran on human creation process; QS. al-Hajj [22]: 5, QS. Hûd [11]: 61, QS. al-Sajdah [32]: 7, QS. al-Saffât [37]: 11, QS. al-Rahmân [55]: 14 and others. The verses are read in order in accordance with the process of the creation of man. The recitation of this time directed at scientific interpretation. Therefore, some of the views of modern science such as medical and others taken into consideration and presented back in it. These readings provide information about the stage of evolution in human creation, not Darwin’s theory of evolution, but the evolution of embryonic, is called Darwinian evolution that occurs in the womb, not in the real world. Based on this it can also be known that man is not the off spring of other animals-which can be said to be lower than beings. This is because human beings as “I” or “<em>nafs</em>” is not limited to a combination of physical and spiritual, but also has a sense or <em>qalb</em>
28
Zhang, De-Xing. "Are we really seeing the big picture? Some reflections on the current debates in evolutionary biology." Current Zoology 61, no. 1 (February 1, 2015): 217–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/czoolo/61.1.217.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract After more than one hundred fifty years of the publication of On the Origin of Species by Darwin, scientists are still arguing on the relative importance of mutation and natural selection, on the driving force of organismal evolution, on microevo-lution and macroevolution, etc. Such periodically repeated debates appeared to have introduced more chaos than musings. What happened and why? Have we really considered our views, opinions and arguments under the big picture of evolution before posing the questions? Or are we talking past each other? We do need some reflections. While we believe that the current evolutionary theory is doing fine, perhaps a refinement or re-encapsulation of its knowledge framework can help promote a better understanding of the evolutionary science as a whole and blow off the mist over the big picture.
29
Verdianto, Yohanes. "Penciptaan Alkitabiah dan Evolusi: Berbagai Upaya untuk Merekonsiliasi Keduanya." KHARISMATA: Jurnal Teologi Pantekosta 3, no. 2 (January 26, 2021): 102–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.47167/kharis.v3i2.19.
Full textAbstract:
Since Charles Darwin wrote his book on the theory of human evolution in 1859, the paradigm of Christians and even Christian theologians have partially endorsed it or at least tried to reconcile ideas about biblical creation and the theory of evolution. Attempts have been made in literary form by Christian theologians who strongly believe in the Bible but at the same time believe in evolution, in their effort to reconcile both. This paper attempts to examine the writings of several theologians on evolution and biblical creation, and then provide rebuttals regarding the views of those who try to reconcile six-day biblical creation with the millions of years of evolutionary theory, but override the authority of Scripture. The expected result in this paper is that the biblical authority and its validity in the story of God’s creation during the six days is literal and cannot be reconciled with the theory of evolution. This paper using a documentary research method, in which the primary resources are the theologians who believe in God and simultaneously believe in the theory of evolution. Secondary resources are needed as a comparison and provide input in connection with this research. AbstrakSejak Charles Darwin menulis bukunya tentang teori evolusi manusia pada tahun 1859, paradigma orang Kristen dan bahkan para teolog Kristen pun sebagian telah mendukungnya atau setidaknya mencoba menyelaraskan ide tentang penciptaan alkitabiah dan teori evolusi. Berbagai upaya telah dibuat dalam bentuk literatur oleh para teolog Kristen yang sangat memercayai Alkitab tapi di saat yang sama juga memercayai evolusi, dalam upaya mereka untuk menyelaraskan keduanya. Makalah ini mencoba untuk menelaah tulisan beberapa teolog sehubungan dengan hal tersebut dan memberikan sanggahan sehubungan dengan pandangan mereka yang mencoba menyelaraskan penciptaan alkitabiah selama enam hari dengan teori evolusi yang berlangsung jutaan tahun, namun dengan mengesampingkan otoritas Kitab Suci. Hasil yang diharapkan dalam makalah ini bahwa otoritas Alkitab dan keabsahannya dalam kisah penciptaan Allah selama enam hari literal adalah benar dan tidak dapat diselaraskan dengan teori evolusi. Makalah ini menggunakan metode studi literatur, di mana sumber utama adalah tulisan para teolog yang memercayai Allah dan secara bersamaan memercayai teori evolusi. Sumber sekunder diperlukan sebagai pembanding dan memberikan masukan sehubungan dengan penelitian ini.
30
Williams, Matthew, and João Teixeira. "A genetic perspective on human origins." Biochemist 42, no. 1 (January 31, 2020): 6–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1042/bio04201006.
Full textAbstract:
Who are we? Where did we come from? Why are we here? These fundamental questions have been widespread throughout human history, shared across different cultures from distant epochs and geographical locations. The search has been as much a philosophical as an empirical one, capturing the imagination of the philosopher, the theologian, the artist and the scientist alike. Hence, the quest for unveiling our origins is probably as old as humanity itself. From a scientific point of view, which we address in the present article, the question of human origins became deeply intertwined with Charles Darwin's theory of evolution in the late 19th century. This led to the development of scientific fields such as palaeoanthropology, which analyses fossil remains, stone tools and cultural artefacts to piece together our past. Recently, however, the possibility to assess genetic information from thousands of individuals across the world and, more importantly, to obtain DNA from specimens that lived thousands of years in the past (so-called ancient DNA [aDNA] analyses) is rapidly transforming long-held beliefs about our origins. As such, we have never been in a better position to ask what do our genomes have to tell us about where we came from. Ultimately, however, can they tell us who we are?
31
Takay, Bahar, and Güler Aydın. "What if Marx and Veblen met…" Ekonomski anali 59, no. 202 (2014): 131–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/eka1402131t.
Full textAbstract:
The aim of this study is to analyse both the differences and the similarities between Marx and Veblen regarding historical specificity, evolution, and alienation. Starting with their discussions on these subjects, this article builds on the analyses of capitalism. The goal of this study is not to collapse Marx and Veblen into one another but rather to understand capitalism by presenting the complementary relationship of the two economists? analyses and to introduce an appropriate analytical framework for understanding capitalism. This study consists of three parts. The first part examines how Veblen regarded Marx?s analysis, and how Marx especially viewed Darwin?s theory of evolution. Marx?s approach to evolution and Veblen?s criticism of Marx on this topic will constitute the general framework of this part. The second part of the study evaluates the level of agreement or disagreement between Veblen and Marx on the idea of historicism from the perspective of dialectical materialism. The last part analyses Marx and Veblen?s different ideas of the concept of alienation. The two economists? views on the capitalist system will be determined based on these three concepts, introducing the similarities between them as well as the differences.
32
Paoletti, Elisa. "Translations as Shapers of Image: Don Carlos Darwin and his Voyage into Spanish on H.M.S. Beagle." TTR : traduction, terminologie, rédaction 18, no. 1 (December 18, 2006): 55–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/014367ar.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract When we think about Charles Darwin, we usually associate him with his theory of evolution and his masterpiece, The Origin of Species. There is a lesser known, younger Darwin who, at 22 years of age, travelled around the world and poured his insightful observations in a very popular travel account, The Voyage of the Beagle. A considerable part of Darwin’s journal was dedicated to South America and, interestingly, it was in the Spanish-speaking regions he visited that he was called “Don Carlos.” This article presents an analysis that will revolve around three translations of The Voyage of the Beagle into Spanish. Their different translation projects will be described case by case and will be finally studied either from a “seer” or a “seen” point of view, which will be closely related to the place of publication and the content included in each translation. We will see the Spanish publishers taking a “seer,” a visitor approach while the South American publishers lean to the “seen,” the visited side and adapt the content of Darwin’s account as a young fledgling scientist accordingly. The different approaches adopted by each of these projects emphasize different traits of Darwin’s image and contribute to its construction in the Spanish-speaking world.
33
Aviezer, Nathan. "On Darwin's Theory of Evolution." School Science and Mathematics 88, no. 7 (November 1988): 565–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1988.tb11855.x.
Full text
34
Hunter, Cornelius. "Evolution as a Theological Research Program." Religions 12, no. 9 (August 30, 2021): 694. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel12090694.
Full textAbstract:
Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution interacted with non-empirical factors including a range of theological concerns. The influence of these theological concerns is typically modeled as secondary to that of empirical evidence. In both Darwin’s thought and later development of the theory of evolution, theological concerns have been viewed as serving in a range of possible roles. However, the theological concerns have consistently been viewed as, ultimately, subservient to empirical science. In the end, science has the final say regarding the content and evaluation of the theory. Here, this paper demonstrates the failure of this model. Theological concerns do have primacy over the science. They motivate the development of evolutionary theory, and they control the interpretation of the empirical evidence and justification of the theory. It is more accurate to view evolution as a theological research program.
35
Maze, Jack, and Cyril V. Finnegan. "Does Darwin's Theory Deserve Theological Support, and Does Evolution Need Darwin's Theory?" Theology and Science 6, no. 2 (May 2008): 239–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14746700801976973.
Full text
36
Yannielli, Joseph. "Darwin's Sacred Cause: How a Hatred of Slavery Shaped Darwin's Views on Human Evolution." Slavery & Abolition 31, no. 1 (March 2010): 148–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01440390903481753.
Full text
37
Padian, Kevin. "Charles Darwin's Views of Classification in Theory and Practice." Systematic Biology 48, no. 2 (June 1, 1999): 352–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/106351599260337.
Full text
38
Breed, David R. "The Evolution of Darwin's Religious Views. Frank Burch Brown." Journal of Religion 69, no. 4 (October 1989): 556–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/488211.
Full text
39
Durant, John R. "The Evolution of Darwin's Religious Views. Frank Burch Brown." Isis 78, no. 2 (June 1987): 267–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/354413.
Full text
40
Geertsema, Henk G. "EMERGENT EVOLUTION? KLAPWIJK AND DOOYEWEERD." Philosophia Reformata 76, no. 1 (November 17, 2011): 50–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/22116117-90000502.
Full textAbstract:
With his book Purpose in the living world? Creation and emergent evolution1 Klapwijk meets two challenges. Often the suggestion is made that the theory of evolution denies any meaning and purpose to the world because everything is the result of chance. Klapwijk argues that the actual process of evolution provides arguments for the opposite view, according to which evolution cannot be properly understood without the recognition of purpose and directionality. The question posed in the main title is definitely given a positive answer. The second challenge concerns the Christian response to the theory of evolution. Should it be rejected because it is incompatible with the belief in creation? Again, Klapwijk’s answer points in the opposite direction. “Darwin’s theory does not undermine the picture of creation but clarifies it.”(Purpose 210) Evidently, Klapwijk’s Christian conviction does not urge him to reject the theory of evolution, trying to find scientific or philosophical arguments against it. The scientific theory of evolution rather is accepted as an established fact. The point is how to interpret (or transform) it in such a way that it can be integrated with the Christian faith.
41
Duening, Thomas, Nigel Nicholson, and Jill Bradley-Geist. "Evolutionary awareness: Darwin among the organizational sciences." International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior 22, no. 4 (November 11, 2019): 297–312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ijotb-12-2018-0127.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose Recent criticisms of organizational science theory have lamented a lack of depth and a growing “maturity” that is impeding empirical advances. The purpose of this paper is to propose that organizational scientists can address this problem by embracing “evolutionary awareness” (EA). EA builds on theories and constructs developed in the evolutionary sciences that serve to add depth to theory building. Design/methodology/approach The design of the paper is first to introduce the concept of EA and identify its four key constructs. Next, the authors apply EA to three areas of research within organizational science: human motivation, interpersonal communication and leadership. The authors’ intent is to show that EA constructs extend and deepen traditional organizational science theorizing. Thereby, the authors show that the problems noted above, i.e., lack of depth and maturing theories, can be addressed by embracing EA. Findings The findings are that EA substantially enhances and freshens theorizing in the organizational sciences in the areas of human motivation, communication and leadership. By extension, other areas of interest will also benefit by embracing the EA perspective. Research limitations/implications The implications of the research are many. Organizational scientists can advance theory building, research and practical prescriptions by embracing EA. They can also engage in interdisciplinary research programs with scholars in the evolutionary sciences eager to see their work having practical implications. The limitation of this work is that the authors were only able to show a limited application of EA to three areas of interest to organizational science scholars. Practical implications The practical implications of this research are potentially far reaching. At this very moment, scholars in a wide array of disciplines are re-casting their views of humanity, cognition, values and other constructs based on the acceptance of evolution and its primary mechanism, variation and selection based on consequences. These changes will usher in new ideas about leadership, work-life balance, organizational purpose and many others. Social implications A much-needed “consilience” across the human sciences through embracement of the EA perspective may provide insights that will advance human flourishing in organizations and beyond. The authors believe that an increasingly veridical understanding of humanity will produce substantial social impact. Originality/value This work will provide an encompassing perspective that will assist organizational scholars in advancing their theory building and research questions. A much-needed “consilience” across the human sciences may provide insights that will advance human flourishing in organizations and beyond.
42
Bhattacharjee, J. K., G. R. Janssen, and T. G. Gregg. "Darwin's Theory of Evolution and Legacy." Microbe Magazine 4, no. 4 (April 1, 2009): 153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/microbe.4.153.1.
Full text
43
Rhodes, Frank H. T., and Frank H. T. Rhodes. "Darwin's search for a theory of the earth: symmetry, simplicity and speculation." British Journal for the History of Science 24, no. 2 (June 1991): 193–229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0007087400027072.
Full textAbstract:
1990 marked the 150th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin's first major scientific theory. The paper, first presented by Darwin to the Geological Society of London on 7 March 1838, was entitled ‘On the Connexion of Certain Volcanic Phenomena and on the Formation of Mountain-Chains and the Effects of Continental Elevations.’ The paper was a remarkable attempt to develop a global tectonic synthesis. It was the culmination of a period of intensive geological activity by Darwin – then twenty-nine – who had returned from the Beagle voyage only eighteen months previously. The present article reviews the development of Darwin's views, their impact upon his contemporaries, their role in shaping his later views on the origin of species, and their significance in scientific theory-making. It draws, in part, on Darwin's unpublished geological notes and jottings. This paper, and the papers by Sandra Herbert and James Secord that accompany it, were delivered at a symposium which I organized at the Geological Society of London on 31 October 1988 to mark the 150th anniversary of the reading of Darwin's paper.
44
Falk, Raphael. "Darwin's Theory of Evolution as a Science." Poetics Today 9, no. 1 (1988): 61. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1772888.
Full text
45
BEINHOCKER, ERIC D. "Evolution as computation: integrating self-organization with generalized Darwinism." Journal of Institutional Economics 7, no. 3 (April 4, 2011): 393–423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1744137411000257.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract:Generalized Darwinism and self-organization have been positioned as competing frameworks for explaining processes of economic and institutional change. Proponents of each view question the ontological validity and explanatory power of the other. This paper argues that information theory, rooted in modern thermodynamics, offers the potential to integrate these two perspectives in a common and rigorous framework. Both evolution and self-organization can be generalized as computational processes that can be applied to human social phenomena. Under this view, evolution is a process of algorithmic search through a combinatorial design space, while self-organization is the result of non-zero sum gains from information aggregation. Evolution depends on the existence of self-organizing forces, and evolution acts on designs for self-organizing structures. The framework yields insights on the role of agency and the emergence of novelty. The paper concludes that information theory may provide a fundamental ontological basis for economic and institutional evolution.
46
Hewlett, Martinez, and Ted Peters. "Why Darwin's theory of evolution deserves theological support." Theology and Science 4, no. 2 (July 2006): 171–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14746700600758903.
Full text
47
Tamir, Pinchas. "The curriculum potential of Darwin's Theory of Evolution." Interchange 24, no. 1-2 (March 1993): 73–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf01447341.
Full text
48
Başar, Erol, and Bahar Güntekin. "Darwin’s evolution theory, brain oscillations, and complex brain function in a new “Cartesian view”." International Journal of Psychophysiology 71, no. 1 (January 2009): 2–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2008.07.018.
Full text
49
Lightman, Bernard. "Darwin and the popularization of evolution." Notes and Records of the Royal Society 64, no. 1 (August 26, 2009): 5–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsnr.2009.0007.
Full textAbstract:
Evolution was popularized from 1860 to 1900 in the USA and Britain in a wide variety of media. Here I investigate traditional texts associated with the intellectual elite, including philosophical or scientific monographs, sermons, and published lectures. Evolution was rarely popularized in ways that reflected Darwin's major contribution to biology, his theory of natural selection. This meant that the reading audience more often encountered an alternative to Darwin's naturalistic, non-directional and non-progressive evolutionary perspective. There were at least four different versions of evolution circulating in the period from 1860 to 1900, and only one conformed to Darwin's vision.
50
Scorza, Fulvio A., Vera C. Terra, Carla A. Scorza, Ricardo M. Arida, and Esper A. Cavalheiro. "Epilepsy research 150 years after Darwin's theory of evolution." Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria 67, no. 4 (December 2009): 1114–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s0004-282x2009000600032.
Full textAbstract:
On February 12, 2009, we commemorated the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin's birth and the 150th anniversary of the publication of the ûrst edition of the "On the origin of species". Only in the sixth edition of the Origin Darwin explicitly stated that natural selection applied to the brain as to all other organs and contemporary epilepsy research plays an interesting role in this scenario. Epilepsy affects approximately 3 percent of the general population and is a complex disease. At least 11 genes have now been described for human epilepsy and over 50 more genes have been identified in animal models of epilepsy. The complex gene to gene interactions and gene-environment interactions may account for epilepsy susceptibility and antiepileptic drug response. Darwin's thoughts on evolution are relevant to understand these gene interactions, contributing to current development of new treatments and prevention of chronic diseases, such as epilepsy.