What do you think?
Rate this book
Basic Questions in Paleontology: Geologic Time, Organic Evolution, and Biological Systematics
Now available in English for the first time, Basic Questions in Paleontology is a landmark work in twentieth-century evolution and paleontology. Originally published in German in 1950, Schindewolf's book was highly controversial for its thoroughgoing anti-Darwinism, but today his ideas are remarkably relevant to current research in evolutionary biology.
"[This book] would rank number one on my list of items awaiting translation from the history of twentieth-century evolutionary theory."—Stephen Jay Gould
"[This book] would rank number one on my list of items awaiting translation from the history of twentieth-century evolutionary theory."—Stephen Jay Gould
494 pages, Paperback
First published January 15, 1994
1 person is currently reading
13 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 of 1 review
January 12, 2025
A GERMAN PALEONTOLOGIST ARGUES FOR A ‘SALTATIONAL’ APPROACH TO EVOLUTION
Stephen Jay Gould wrote in his Foreword to this 1950 book, “Schindewolf … stands as a primary anti-Darwinian icon almost entirely by reputation, rather than by explicit study or confrontation with his actual words… [This book] is a credo or manifesto for a saltational, internally driven evolutionism in the Continental formalist tradition versus the longstanding English preference for functionalist theories based on continuous adaptation to a changing external environment.: (Pg. xi) Later, he adds, “In this book, Schindewolf says nothing at all about a proposal that would win him much notoriety during the 1960s---mass extinction provoked by explosion of supernovae… Schindewolf actually used this speculation to defend his internalist theory against accumulating evidence for the importance of mass extinction.” (Pg. xiii)
Schindewolf (1896-1971) states, “When… the preserved [paleontological] material is sufficient to substantiate continuous evolutionary lineages WITHIN the individual structural designs it should follow, if the assumption of a gradual bridging of the type boundaries by means of small developmental steps is correct… the same situation applies BETWEEN them… However, there are no special conditions whatever in the fossil record that would indicate that gaps had repeatedly affected only the sequences that connect structural designs. The gaps that exist in the continuity of forms… are not to be blamed on the fossil record; they are not illusions, but the expression of a natural, primary absence of transitional forms… It should make us stop and think, however, that among them, in spite of tireless search, the hoped-for series of connecting forms---the ‘missing links’…---have never been found.” (Pg. 105-106)
He notes, “in the Middle Devonian and the Upper Triassic… their absence during the long intervening period can only be interpreted as meaning that the presumed intermediate forms never lived, that the two types are not in any way related but rather only resemble each other superficially, providing an example of convergent evolution.” (Pg. 108-109)
He says of the Triassic ammonoids, “Once the basic new organization was established, another intensive radiation set in immediately, in large evolutionary steps and at a rapid evolutionary tempo; the stock broke up into a great many different models and separate lineages, which we encounter in particular in the lowest Lias of the Mediterranean area… Later on, within each lineage evolution proceeded gradually and continuously in small, individual steps. Here, we observe many transitional, intermediate forms…” (Pg. 141)
Of the genus Heterophyllia, he comments, “This is yet another situation in which there is a clear separation between basic structural characters, which arose discontinuously, introduced the new type, and became the common property of all of the members of that type, and the subordinate special, or specific, characters, which affect only certain individual groups and exhibit gradual change in small individual steps.” (Pg. 164)
He notes, “it should be emphasized that there is no way that there could be transitional forms as they have often been envisaged and required, namely, forms that are intermediate in every aspect... The two circulatory systems leading from the heart cannot be both separate and not separate… Intermediate forms in the true sense cannot be expected in these cases; the most one will find are composite types, which combine features of one group with those of another, and composites like these are, in fact, present in abundance. Further … the various structural designs and organizations that do appear in sequence are always connected by a large number of common characters and organs and that the new organizations build upon the old. The fact cannot be disputed, nor can it be based on chance… it must be regarded as infinitely more probable that one type… EVOLVED from another than that its enormously complex organization was, in the biblical sense, CREATED from the void… there is no doubt that the supposition of a bridging between those designs by some kind of evolutionary process between those designs presents far fewer intellectual difficulties than does the claim for independent creation of an entire new type.” (Pg. 169)
He asserts, “the theory of evolutionary descent is not simply an intellectual possibility but a compelling intellectual necessity. Only by accepting this theory can we explain the existing evidence, which, with its countless individual features, would otherwise be completely inexplicable.” (Pg, 172-173) He adds, “an exact reproduction of a former ancestral form will never come about. This is what is meant by the irreversibility of evolution.” (Pg. 178) He continues, “Irreversibility is an unshakable, essential feature of evolution.” (Pg. 186)
He outlines, “three phases of differing evolutionary rates and differing modes of development can be distinguished. At the onset… there is a brief period of abrupt development of forms… This is followed by a second phase, one of type constancy, or typostasis, which entails a progressive elaboration… the third phase---typolysis, or the dissolution of types.. brings each evolutionary cycle to a close.” (Pg. 193)
He states, “smooth transitions between these two different developmental types are unknown and scarcely even imaginable.” (Pg. 206) He continues, “The general conclusion emerging .. is that all decisive transformations of the basic structures of the higher-ranking types are brought about in large, individual steps with far-reaching consequences, without links or transitions, in early ontogenetic stages… the discontinuous nature of the transformation seems to be a logical necessity, especially for all alternative changes in important functional organs, those that MUST be present in either one form or the other if the organism is to be viable.” (Pg. 211)
He notes, “When we see that, in the various evolutionary stages of the human, in Pithecanthropus, in the Neanderthals, and finally in recent humans, the characteristics of the juvenile skull become gradually more pronounced as they extend to later ontogentic stages … it means that the phenomenon is truly evolutionary…” (Pg. 223)
He states, “it can also be ruled out with certainty that the fossil record is incomplete… that layers are missing from the profile. Therefore, we must consider that large typal discontinuities exist; no connecting links of any kind ever lived anywhere.” (Pg. 246) He continues, “we see in the regularly recurring pattern of the fossil record a reflection incomplete in detail yet on the whole faithful, of the actual situation: a natural lack of intermediate forms and the existence of real gaps between individual types… the only inaccessible evidence is possibly the embryonic and early juvenile stages at which the decisive, morphological novelties came about and which, alone, constitute any transitions.” (Pg. 250)
He asserts, “The only things we can count on observing are ‘monstrosities' … or ‘typal transformations of limited extent,’ which affect the structural system and may serve as models for development of the comprehensive types to which they are connected by intermediate stages of every degree.” (Pg. 252) Later, he adds, “in the typostatic phase, the course of unfolding is compulsory, following a linear, consistent progression, which is called ‘orthogenesis.’” (Pg. 268)
He says, “the actual causes of degeneration and extinction lie deeper and manifest themselves earlier than any environmental influences whatsoever that one might at first wish to hold responsible based on appearances.” (Pg. 323) Later, he adds, “it can scarcely be decided with certainty based only on fossil materials whether and to what extent macromutations are triggered by environmental changes or were so triggered in the geologic past… These important upheavals have long been recognized and used in the classification of geological time.” (Pg. 352) He states “All systematic categories, the species as well as the higher units, are, rather, of a general conceptual nature; they have no tangible, material actuality but are solely metaphysical realities." (Pg. 381)
He concludes, “the characteristic gradations of the system and its discontinuities may well confirm our ideas of the saltational nature of phylogeny. Since, further, the organizational traits of a higher category are common to all the categories subordinate to it, we must conclude that the type features of the higher units arose historically-temporally before those of lower ones, that the general features arose before the progressively more specialized sets of characters.” (Pg. 415)
This book will be of keen interest to those studying evolutionary theory.
Stephen Jay Gould wrote in his Foreword to this 1950 book, “Schindewolf … stands as a primary anti-Darwinian icon almost entirely by reputation, rather than by explicit study or confrontation with his actual words… [This book] is a credo or manifesto for a saltational, internally driven evolutionism in the Continental formalist tradition versus the longstanding English preference for functionalist theories based on continuous adaptation to a changing external environment.: (Pg. xi) Later, he adds, “In this book, Schindewolf says nothing at all about a proposal that would win him much notoriety during the 1960s---mass extinction provoked by explosion of supernovae… Schindewolf actually used this speculation to defend his internalist theory against accumulating evidence for the importance of mass extinction.” (Pg. xiii)
Schindewolf (1896-1971) states, “When… the preserved [paleontological] material is sufficient to substantiate continuous evolutionary lineages WITHIN the individual structural designs it should follow, if the assumption of a gradual bridging of the type boundaries by means of small developmental steps is correct… the same situation applies BETWEEN them… However, there are no special conditions whatever in the fossil record that would indicate that gaps had repeatedly affected only the sequences that connect structural designs. The gaps that exist in the continuity of forms… are not to be blamed on the fossil record; they are not illusions, but the expression of a natural, primary absence of transitional forms… It should make us stop and think, however, that among them, in spite of tireless search, the hoped-for series of connecting forms---the ‘missing links’…---have never been found.” (Pg. 105-106)
He notes, “in the Middle Devonian and the Upper Triassic… their absence during the long intervening period can only be interpreted as meaning that the presumed intermediate forms never lived, that the two types are not in any way related but rather only resemble each other superficially, providing an example of convergent evolution.” (Pg. 108-109)
He says of the Triassic ammonoids, “Once the basic new organization was established, another intensive radiation set in immediately, in large evolutionary steps and at a rapid evolutionary tempo; the stock broke up into a great many different models and separate lineages, which we encounter in particular in the lowest Lias of the Mediterranean area… Later on, within each lineage evolution proceeded gradually and continuously in small, individual steps. Here, we observe many transitional, intermediate forms…” (Pg. 141)
Of the genus Heterophyllia, he comments, “This is yet another situation in which there is a clear separation between basic structural characters, which arose discontinuously, introduced the new type, and became the common property of all of the members of that type, and the subordinate special, or specific, characters, which affect only certain individual groups and exhibit gradual change in small individual steps.” (Pg. 164)
He notes, “it should be emphasized that there is no way that there could be transitional forms as they have often been envisaged and required, namely, forms that are intermediate in every aspect... The two circulatory systems leading from the heart cannot be both separate and not separate… Intermediate forms in the true sense cannot be expected in these cases; the most one will find are composite types, which combine features of one group with those of another, and composites like these are, in fact, present in abundance. Further … the various structural designs and organizations that do appear in sequence are always connected by a large number of common characters and organs and that the new organizations build upon the old. The fact cannot be disputed, nor can it be based on chance… it must be regarded as infinitely more probable that one type… EVOLVED from another than that its enormously complex organization was, in the biblical sense, CREATED from the void… there is no doubt that the supposition of a bridging between those designs by some kind of evolutionary process between those designs presents far fewer intellectual difficulties than does the claim for independent creation of an entire new type.” (Pg. 169)
He asserts, “the theory of evolutionary descent is not simply an intellectual possibility but a compelling intellectual necessity. Only by accepting this theory can we explain the existing evidence, which, with its countless individual features, would otherwise be completely inexplicable.” (Pg, 172-173) He adds, “an exact reproduction of a former ancestral form will never come about. This is what is meant by the irreversibility of evolution.” (Pg. 178) He continues, “Irreversibility is an unshakable, essential feature of evolution.” (Pg. 186)
He outlines, “three phases of differing evolutionary rates and differing modes of development can be distinguished. At the onset… there is a brief period of abrupt development of forms… This is followed by a second phase, one of type constancy, or typostasis, which entails a progressive elaboration… the third phase---typolysis, or the dissolution of types.. brings each evolutionary cycle to a close.” (Pg. 193)
He states, “smooth transitions between these two different developmental types are unknown and scarcely even imaginable.” (Pg. 206) He continues, “The general conclusion emerging .. is that all decisive transformations of the basic structures of the higher-ranking types are brought about in large, individual steps with far-reaching consequences, without links or transitions, in early ontogenetic stages… the discontinuous nature of the transformation seems to be a logical necessity, especially for all alternative changes in important functional organs, those that MUST be present in either one form or the other if the organism is to be viable.” (Pg. 211)
He notes, “When we see that, in the various evolutionary stages of the human, in Pithecanthropus, in the Neanderthals, and finally in recent humans, the characteristics of the juvenile skull become gradually more pronounced as they extend to later ontogentic stages … it means that the phenomenon is truly evolutionary…” (Pg. 223)
He states, “it can also be ruled out with certainty that the fossil record is incomplete… that layers are missing from the profile. Therefore, we must consider that large typal discontinuities exist; no connecting links of any kind ever lived anywhere.” (Pg. 246) He continues, “we see in the regularly recurring pattern of the fossil record a reflection incomplete in detail yet on the whole faithful, of the actual situation: a natural lack of intermediate forms and the existence of real gaps between individual types… the only inaccessible evidence is possibly the embryonic and early juvenile stages at which the decisive, morphological novelties came about and which, alone, constitute any transitions.” (Pg. 250)
He asserts, “The only things we can count on observing are ‘monstrosities' … or ‘typal transformations of limited extent,’ which affect the structural system and may serve as models for development of the comprehensive types to which they are connected by intermediate stages of every degree.” (Pg. 252) Later, he adds, “in the typostatic phase, the course of unfolding is compulsory, following a linear, consistent progression, which is called ‘orthogenesis.’” (Pg. 268)
He says, “the actual causes of degeneration and extinction lie deeper and manifest themselves earlier than any environmental influences whatsoever that one might at first wish to hold responsible based on appearances.” (Pg. 323) Later, he adds, “it can scarcely be decided with certainty based only on fossil materials whether and to what extent macromutations are triggered by environmental changes or were so triggered in the geologic past… These important upheavals have long been recognized and used in the classification of geological time.” (Pg. 352) He states “All systematic categories, the species as well as the higher units, are, rather, of a general conceptual nature; they have no tangible, material actuality but are solely metaphysical realities." (Pg. 381)
He concludes, “the characteristic gradations of the system and its discontinuities may well confirm our ideas of the saltational nature of phylogeny. Since, further, the organizational traits of a higher category are common to all the categories subordinate to it, we must conclude that the type features of the higher units arose historically-temporally before those of lower ones, that the general features arose before the progressively more specialized sets of characters.” (Pg. 415)
This book will be of keen interest to those studying evolutionary theory.
Displaying 1 of 1 review