What do you think?
Rate this book
Beyond Natural Selection
in this broad and highly readable inquiry, Robert Wesson proposes an approach to evolution that is more in harmony with modern science than Darwinism or neoDarwinism. He emphasizes the importance for evolution of inner direction and the self-organizing capacities of life, a view that is better able to account for the chaotic nature of the evolutionary process and the inherent propensity of complex dynamic systems to grow more complex with time. Many examples of plants and animals support this idea, and Wesson includes both carefully documented scientific facts and intriguing anecdotes about the odd aberrations in natural selection. Books by Robert Wesson include Cosmos and Metacosmos.
369 pages, Paperback
First published July 1, 1991
2 people are currently reading
43 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
January 19, 2025
A POLITICAL SCIENTIST AND GEOLOGIST CRITIQUES NATURAL SELECTION AS INADEQUATE
Author Robert Wesson wrote in the Introduction to this 1991 book, “The reality of evolution is not questioned in the scientific community. But we do not know what to make of the kinship of living beings unless we understand why different species came to be so very different. It is important for our self-estimate how the first little self-reproducing, that is, living globules gave rise to such admirable animals as ourselves… Although a large majority of biologists accept Darwin’s theory with few qualifications, many were dubious of it from the time Darwin proposed it until well into this century, when it was systematized in the neo-Darwinist synthesis… Recently, however, there have been increasing tendencies to doubt that the role of natural selection is as great as has been assumed, and a growing number of biologists believe that it is not a wholly satisfactory answer. Its inadequacy is a thesis of this book…
“In this view, evolution is not only adaptation, as Darwinism stresses, but also the realization of inherent potentials. What a species becomes depends on both its relationship to its environment and its heritage of constitution… How the evolution of a species is conditioned by internal factors is difficult to evaluate, but there is much reason to believe that evolution, although conditioned by natural selection, is to a large extent innerdirected. This book can only skim the disciplines involved and the knowledge available… Evolution clearly is much more interesting than would appear from the simple theory of change by random variation and selection, and it is much more awesome and meaningful for the comprehension of our existence.”
He explains, “To attain flight, bats and pterosaurs modified the forelimb much more drastically than birds did… the bats and pterosaurs stretched fingers out to double the length of the rest of the body, a modification that would seem useless in its initial stages and difficult for gliders…. The problem of the evolution of bats’ flight is like that of birds… A difficulty is that if a glider like a flying squirrel began flapping its membrane to control its glide, the obvious course was to lengthen the forelimbs, not the toes. But the earliest known bats are finger fliers, almost indistinguishable from modern bats… Insect wings are extensions of the integument of the thorax, and their genesis required for the concurrent development of a light but stiffened membrane, a joint to the body, and stiffened muscles … along with the controls necessary for flying. There is speculation that insect wings originated as an outgrowth of larval gills or as thermoregulatory devices. It is possible that the sails of some dinosaurs served this function, but no insects are known to have such an organ, and they hardly need it because they can easily regulate temperature by moving into or out of the sunshine… It should be easier for a small animal to develop flight because of the relationship between surface and weight. But no other invertebrate class has done so.” (Pg. 49)
He observes, “We are so familiar with the achievements and eccentricities of [ourselves]… that we think little of them. But evolutionary theory must apply to Homo sapiens as well as other forms of life, and it is very difficult to account for all the oddities and capabilities of humans, from storytelling to leadership to religion, in biological terms.” (Pg. 79) Later, he adds, “Humans demonstrate, perhaps better than almost any other creature, a truth of evolution: the way to more effective structures and instincts is paved with nonutilitarian changes that came about in unknown ways.” (Pg. 96)
He notes, “Tyrannosaurus had a huge tail of questionable utility… Such tails must have been a great impediment as well as metabolic expense… The tails of dinosaurs were exaggerated, but modern lizards also have tails of no apparent utility… Oddly enough, the birds have shortened the graceful tail of Archaeopteryx to a mere stub. Early pterosaurs had a long tail; later pterosaurs, like birds, reduced it to a stump.” (Pg. 91-92)
He suggests, “It is not necessary to burden evolutionary theory with accounting for a host of differences. It would be extremely satisfying to find or surmise an adaptive reason for everything, but there may be no particular meaning in a million details of living nature, just as there is no significance in the details… of snowflakes or the ocean breakers or the folds of mountain ranges.” (Pg. 154)
He argues, “It is difficult to understand how sexual selection by display can exist. Force can overrule show; when male birds gather to strut their charms, it should be easy for one with shorter feathers but stronger beak and more truculent disposition to drive others away. And the female, if she cannot have a helpmate, would do better to choose a strong fighter than the bearer of a gorgeous cape… Yet only a few birds (such as ostriches) fight for the … possession of mates, although many are territorial.” (Pg. 169)
He summarizes, “Conventional evolutionary theory… is incomplete, despite or because of its neatness and the logical charm of building on a few axioms. The difficulties that it confronts… are various. But most of them seem to indicate that the genome is less the passive subject of environment and random variations sifted by natural selection than an active maker of a future that is chaotically open, however constrained by the material environment and its past… the genome has much more autonomy than [has] usually been credited to it…” (Pg. 291-292)
He outlines, “First, adaptation often fails to correspond to habit, as shown by the (1) success of widespread species… over a wide range of conditions; (2) incompleteness of modification to fit a changed environment… (3) incompleteness of adjustment to a changed way of life… (4) failure of species to track closely the environment, remaining static until replaced by a new species; and (5) near invariance of ‘living fossils.’
“Second, many traits are seemingly independent of adaptive needs, as one sees in… the endless variety of traits of no evident utility… Third, evolution often has apparently maladaptive outcomes, as in… failure of organisms to exercise maximum power of reproduction… seemingly needless early death… Fourth, patterns impose themselves, as one sees in a … coherence of pattern in taxa… lack of fossil evidence of gradual transitions between patterns… Finally, evolution achieves many adaptations---things beyond the powers of natural selection, such as ... organs and instincts for which it is difficult to envision viable intermediate stages or which require different unlikely changes to come together for utility… complex instinctual patterns unattainable by random input; and … the unaccountable achievement of high intelligence, as in porpoises and humans.” (Pg. 292-293)
He concludes, “To insist on strict Darwinism is to be a philosophic materialist; a mechanistic or reductionist view of our origins leads straight to a mechanistic or reductionist view of ourselves. There is something of self-hate in the materialist approach. It depreciates the life of the mind and works of the imagination and character. It demeans the richness and wonder of nature. It seems to make unnecessary further thinking about the mysteries of existence, of life and the universe. If one is gripped by the idea that we were made by chance… and are not intrinsically superior to amoebas… one is not prepared to cope with the responsibility of intelligence and power.” (Pg. 308)
He closes the book, “Human civilization is not an end but a vaulting into the unknown. It is a supreme glory that humans can decide what destiny they desire and, if wise enough, can make their own evolution.” (Pg. 309)
This book will be of keen interest to those seeking creative perspectives on evolutionary theory.
Author Robert Wesson wrote in the Introduction to this 1991 book, “The reality of evolution is not questioned in the scientific community. But we do not know what to make of the kinship of living beings unless we understand why different species came to be so very different. It is important for our self-estimate how the first little self-reproducing, that is, living globules gave rise to such admirable animals as ourselves… Although a large majority of biologists accept Darwin’s theory with few qualifications, many were dubious of it from the time Darwin proposed it until well into this century, when it was systematized in the neo-Darwinist synthesis… Recently, however, there have been increasing tendencies to doubt that the role of natural selection is as great as has been assumed, and a growing number of biologists believe that it is not a wholly satisfactory answer. Its inadequacy is a thesis of this book…
“In this view, evolution is not only adaptation, as Darwinism stresses, but also the realization of inherent potentials. What a species becomes depends on both its relationship to its environment and its heritage of constitution… How the evolution of a species is conditioned by internal factors is difficult to evaluate, but there is much reason to believe that evolution, although conditioned by natural selection, is to a large extent innerdirected. This book can only skim the disciplines involved and the knowledge available… Evolution clearly is much more interesting than would appear from the simple theory of change by random variation and selection, and it is much more awesome and meaningful for the comprehension of our existence.”
He explains, “To attain flight, bats and pterosaurs modified the forelimb much more drastically than birds did… the bats and pterosaurs stretched fingers out to double the length of the rest of the body, a modification that would seem useless in its initial stages and difficult for gliders…. The problem of the evolution of bats’ flight is like that of birds… A difficulty is that if a glider like a flying squirrel began flapping its membrane to control its glide, the obvious course was to lengthen the forelimbs, not the toes. But the earliest known bats are finger fliers, almost indistinguishable from modern bats… Insect wings are extensions of the integument of the thorax, and their genesis required for the concurrent development of a light but stiffened membrane, a joint to the body, and stiffened muscles … along with the controls necessary for flying. There is speculation that insect wings originated as an outgrowth of larval gills or as thermoregulatory devices. It is possible that the sails of some dinosaurs served this function, but no insects are known to have such an organ, and they hardly need it because they can easily regulate temperature by moving into or out of the sunshine… It should be easier for a small animal to develop flight because of the relationship between surface and weight. But no other invertebrate class has done so.” (Pg. 49)
He observes, “We are so familiar with the achievements and eccentricities of [ourselves]… that we think little of them. But evolutionary theory must apply to Homo sapiens as well as other forms of life, and it is very difficult to account for all the oddities and capabilities of humans, from storytelling to leadership to religion, in biological terms.” (Pg. 79) Later, he adds, “Humans demonstrate, perhaps better than almost any other creature, a truth of evolution: the way to more effective structures and instincts is paved with nonutilitarian changes that came about in unknown ways.” (Pg. 96)
He notes, “Tyrannosaurus had a huge tail of questionable utility… Such tails must have been a great impediment as well as metabolic expense… The tails of dinosaurs were exaggerated, but modern lizards also have tails of no apparent utility… Oddly enough, the birds have shortened the graceful tail of Archaeopteryx to a mere stub. Early pterosaurs had a long tail; later pterosaurs, like birds, reduced it to a stump.” (Pg. 91-92)
He suggests, “It is not necessary to burden evolutionary theory with accounting for a host of differences. It would be extremely satisfying to find or surmise an adaptive reason for everything, but there may be no particular meaning in a million details of living nature, just as there is no significance in the details… of snowflakes or the ocean breakers or the folds of mountain ranges.” (Pg. 154)
He argues, “It is difficult to understand how sexual selection by display can exist. Force can overrule show; when male birds gather to strut their charms, it should be easy for one with shorter feathers but stronger beak and more truculent disposition to drive others away. And the female, if she cannot have a helpmate, would do better to choose a strong fighter than the bearer of a gorgeous cape… Yet only a few birds (such as ostriches) fight for the … possession of mates, although many are territorial.” (Pg. 169)
He summarizes, “Conventional evolutionary theory… is incomplete, despite or because of its neatness and the logical charm of building on a few axioms. The difficulties that it confronts… are various. But most of them seem to indicate that the genome is less the passive subject of environment and random variations sifted by natural selection than an active maker of a future that is chaotically open, however constrained by the material environment and its past… the genome has much more autonomy than [has] usually been credited to it…” (Pg. 291-292)
He outlines, “First, adaptation often fails to correspond to habit, as shown by the (1) success of widespread species… over a wide range of conditions; (2) incompleteness of modification to fit a changed environment… (3) incompleteness of adjustment to a changed way of life… (4) failure of species to track closely the environment, remaining static until replaced by a new species; and (5) near invariance of ‘living fossils.’
“Second, many traits are seemingly independent of adaptive needs, as one sees in… the endless variety of traits of no evident utility… Third, evolution often has apparently maladaptive outcomes, as in… failure of organisms to exercise maximum power of reproduction… seemingly needless early death… Fourth, patterns impose themselves, as one sees in a … coherence of pattern in taxa… lack of fossil evidence of gradual transitions between patterns… Finally, evolution achieves many adaptations---things beyond the powers of natural selection, such as ... organs and instincts for which it is difficult to envision viable intermediate stages or which require different unlikely changes to come together for utility… complex instinctual patterns unattainable by random input; and … the unaccountable achievement of high intelligence, as in porpoises and humans.” (Pg. 292-293)
He concludes, “To insist on strict Darwinism is to be a philosophic materialist; a mechanistic or reductionist view of our origins leads straight to a mechanistic or reductionist view of ourselves. There is something of self-hate in the materialist approach. It depreciates the life of the mind and works of the imagination and character. It demeans the richness and wonder of nature. It seems to make unnecessary further thinking about the mysteries of existence, of life and the universe. If one is gripped by the idea that we were made by chance… and are not intrinsically superior to amoebas… one is not prepared to cope with the responsibility of intelligence and power.” (Pg. 308)
He closes the book, “Human civilization is not an end but a vaulting into the unknown. It is a supreme glory that humans can decide what destiny they desire and, if wise enough, can make their own evolution.” (Pg. 309)
This book will be of keen interest to those seeking creative perspectives on evolutionary theory.
Want to read
July 31, 2007Thus far:
We should be careful not to let the politics of 'intelligent' design deter the critique of neo-Darwinisn. Natural Selection has a lot of holes as a theory and doesn't take account of recent findings in areas such as self-organizing systems, fractal geometry, and chaos theory. All of these fields could help contribute to a more robust evolutionary theory which comprises more axioms than simply a) slow, random mutation and b)natural selection.
We should be careful not to let the politics of 'intelligent' design deter the critique of neo-Darwinisn. Natural Selection has a lot of holes as a theory and doesn't take account of recent findings in areas such as self-organizing systems, fractal geometry, and chaos theory. All of these fields could help contribute to a more robust evolutionary theory which comprises more axioms than simply a) slow, random mutation and b)natural selection.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews