What do you think?
Rate this book
Dance to the Tune of Life: Biological Relativity
In this thought-provoking book, Denis Noble formulates the theory of biological relativity, emphasising that living organisms operate at multiple levels of complexity and must therefore be analysed from a multi-scale, relativistic perspective. Noble explains that all biological processes operate by means of molecular, cellular and organismal networks. The interactive nature of these fundamental processes is at the core of biological relativity and, as such, challenges simplified molecular reductionism. Noble shows that such an integrative view emerges as the necessary consequence of the rigorous application of mathematics to biology. Drawing on his pioneering work in the mathematical physics of biology, he shows that what emerges is a deeply humane picture of the role of the organism in constraining its chemistry, including its genes, to serve the organism as a whole, especially in the interaction with its social environment. This humanistic, holistic approach challenges the common gene-centred view held by many in modern biology and culture.
284 pages, Kindle Edition
Published December 1, 2016
58 people are currently reading
603 people want to read
About the author
Denis Noble
23 books59 followersDenis Noble is Emeritus Professor of Cardiovascular Physiology. He now directs the computational physiology research group. He was the first to model cardiac cells (in two papers in Nature in 1960) and has published over 350 research papers. He is one of the leaders of Systems Biology and has written the first popular book on Systems Biology, The MUSIC of LIFE (OUP, 2006).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
March 14, 2017
Noble's theory of Biological Relativity views organisms as open, purposeful, complex systems, functioning at multiple levels of organization. This book presents his theory vividly by backing it up with insights from epigenetics, systems biology and evolutionary developmental biology. What we get as a result is an integrated, as opposed to reductionist, approach to understanding life. An approach that aims at applying relativistic ideas from physics and cosmology to the domain of biology. All this amounts to a substantial attack on the current 'dogma' in Evolutionary Theory: Neo-Darwinism, a.k.a. the Modern Synthesis. What distinguishes Noble, however, from other proponents of the recently proposed Extended Evolutionary Synthesis is his humble and guarded attitude in presenting ideas and their natural conclusions. An example of this is the last chapter of the book where he discusses some of the epistemological implications of Biological Relativity. The conclusion from that chapter is that there is no such thing as science without preconceived beliefs, and that an explanation at one level of abstraction is not always illuminating when taken at another.
In terms of writing style, the text is clear and inspiring, reminiscent of works by Richard Dawkins, who, ironically, is one of the main antagonists in the story. Similarly to Dawkins, Noble presents his ideas by telling an illuminating story, capable of capturing the reader's imagination. He combines scientific arguments with personal stories in a non-intrusive manner. In a way, the reader gets to know Denis Noble, a professor in physiology, and a person with broad interests ranging from philosophy to cosmology, and the arts. I have been lucky enough to meet Prof. Noble personally once, at a conference on Evolutionary Theory. I remember him as an eloquent speaker and a jolly old man.
In terms of writing style, the text is clear and inspiring, reminiscent of works by Richard Dawkins, who, ironically, is one of the main antagonists in the story. Similarly to Dawkins, Noble presents his ideas by telling an illuminating story, capable of capturing the reader's imagination. He combines scientific arguments with personal stories in a non-intrusive manner. In a way, the reader gets to know Denis Noble, a professor in physiology, and a person with broad interests ranging from philosophy to cosmology, and the arts. I have been lucky enough to meet Prof. Noble personally once, at a conference on Evolutionary Theory. I remember him as an eloquent speaker and a jolly old man.
April 30, 2017
‘Dogmas have no role in science’. I absolutely loved this book! You can argue that I was already in the camp of the converted to Prof Noble’s view before picking up this book as a geneticist who had spent several years working in the field of proteostasis. However, this book not only offers a very condensed, logically constructed and well substantiated state of the recent evolutionary theory but it also offers an excellent introduction to epistemology.
I will highly recommend this book to anyone with an interest in genetics and evolution, all Biology 6th form and above students and to all Biology teachers who did not come across epigenetic and most recent developments in the Modern Synthesis model of evolution in their studies, and to all the fans and opponents of Richard Dawkins.
Whatever your starting level of knowledge is I can guaranty you will find something new and interesting in this book written well by a person who is not only still a practicing scientist but is most definitely a natural teacher.
I will highly recommend this book to anyone with an interest in genetics and evolution, all Biology 6th form and above students and to all Biology teachers who did not come across epigenetic and most recent developments in the Modern Synthesis model of evolution in their studies, and to all the fans and opponents of Richard Dawkins.
Whatever your starting level of knowledge is I can guaranty you will find something new and interesting in this book written well by a person who is not only still a practicing scientist but is most definitely a natural teacher.
July 19, 2019
Three degrees in biology and now I have to unlearn a lot of the basic stuff. This is a revolutionary book. I wonder if his thesis will stand the test of time. I didn't see anything that struck me as unscientific. It's just that sometimes a person has to take a step back and look at evidence that didn't fit the prevailing beliefs. Put it all together and it appears Lamarck was right all along. That Neo-Darwinism and the Modern Synthesis are too simple minded. Cells, organs, tissues and organisms are more critical than DNA. That evolution is more than natural selection of random mutations. There is a lot to think about in this book and I like it.
May 30, 2023
This book discusses the flaws in the ‘atomistic’ gene-centric nature of Neo-Darwinism. It's a refreshing viewpoint and goes through the historical and technical details of its various arguments. Noble briefly touches on his biological relativity idea but doesn't delve into its details. He also limits his discussion to evolution and doesn't provide a practical conclusion for implementing his theory in modern biology. Although I enjoyed his philosophical approach to the problem, I wished he could discuss more the implications of his theory in changing the mainstream omics techniques and approaches to biomedicine.
February 23, 2025
I don't think I'm the target audience for this book, because I'm already firmly in the biological relativism camp. I think it would be great for anyone who is still clinging to a gene-centric idea of life and evolution, but I wish that the theory of biological relativity had been fleshed out more. Noble spends a lot of time (too much!) fighting against the status quo theories that could have been used to build out biological relativity for the uninitiated reader instead.
November 22, 2025
solid 4. "biological relativity" could be stated in a sentence, but thats almost a strength. and it organizes a lot of interesting biology to contextualize / prove it. much better written and cited than a certain other anti-reductionist pro-hierarchy+spirituality book. "This is your new set of glasses"
March 13, 2024
An accessible introduction to the systems view of life.
In this book, Noble presents an emerging story about the nature of life and how it evolved that expands upon the familiar story of Darwin and Mendel, and takes it in new directions. To help the reader understand the new theory and the need for it, Noble gives a thorough overview of the relevant biological theory, the history of how it was developed, and the evidence that challenges that view and suggests something else. He then explains a new way to tell the story of life, and explores some of the consequences for our understanding of life and for future research.
This book is well written, short, and easy to read. It's very friendly for a general audience, but, on the flip side, it's also relatively shallow. Fully two thirds of this book is devoted to background knowledge, which is great for some, but will be tiresome for folks who already have solid grounding in systems biology and evolutionary theory. The last few chapters introduce new theory and ideas, but only very briefly and without much detail or technical depth. It introduces some mind-expanding ideas, but anyone who wants a fuller understanding of these ideas and their consequences will have to turn to other books.
This is the perfect gentle introduction to modern evolutionary theory for someone who isn't very confident in their biology knowledge.
If you're already excited by epigenetics, niche construction, and the role organisms play in their own evolution, you might appreciate the elegant ways Noble describes these ideas, but you won't learn much new. You'd be better off with a book like Evolution in Four Dimensions, which is a more challenging read, but full of specific examples, detailed theory, and deep analysis.
In this book, Noble presents an emerging story about the nature of life and how it evolved that expands upon the familiar story of Darwin and Mendel, and takes it in new directions. To help the reader understand the new theory and the need for it, Noble gives a thorough overview of the relevant biological theory, the history of how it was developed, and the evidence that challenges that view and suggests something else. He then explains a new way to tell the story of life, and explores some of the consequences for our understanding of life and for future research.
This book is well written, short, and easy to read. It's very friendly for a general audience, but, on the flip side, it's also relatively shallow. Fully two thirds of this book is devoted to background knowledge, which is great for some, but will be tiresome for folks who already have solid grounding in systems biology and evolutionary theory. The last few chapters introduce new theory and ideas, but only very briefly and without much detail or technical depth. It introduces some mind-expanding ideas, but anyone who wants a fuller understanding of these ideas and their consequences will have to turn to other books.
This is the perfect gentle introduction to modern evolutionary theory for someone who isn't very confident in their biology knowledge.
If you're already excited by epigenetics, niche construction, and the role organisms play in their own evolution, you might appreciate the elegant ways Noble describes these ideas, but you won't learn much new. You'd be better off with a book like Evolution in Four Dimensions, which is a more challenging read, but full of specific examples, detailed theory, and deep analysis.
April 22, 2024
The central dogma of molecular biology tells us that biological cybernetics is a one way street. That is: DNA codes for RNA, which codes for proteins. You can take this a step further and conceive of an organism's development as the "unfolding of what is in the DNA 'blueprint'" [132]. Noble calls this view "Neo-Darwinist". In this world, your genes are the "active cause" that determine who you are [150].
In 2005, Yonghua Sun replaced the nucleus of a fertilized egg cell from one species of fish with the nucleus of a close relative species. The fish developed and exhibited a phenotype that was sort of half way between the two species [149]. If DNA is the information content that defines an organism, this is a weird result! You'd expect the fish to look like the DNA donor species. Obviously the 3 dimensional egg cell itself contains a lot of information [151].
Noble develops this insight further to posit a theory of Biological Relativity: that "there is no global frame of causality in organisms" [160]. He encourages us to see DNA as a template that is selectively called upon and given meaning by the organism but not the prime mover; what it does (and how it is modified both chemically and morphologically) is influenced by the organism at all levels (cells, tissues, etc).
------
Maybe I'm selling this a bit short (and the book is more or less a big argument against a particular reductionist view of biology) but if I had to be reductionist and distill it down I think the message here is "DNA isn't as important as you think". One turn more of complexity gives you "DNA isn't the only information content reflected in the development of an organism".
Then it is reasonable to ask "so what?" There actually isn't some new biological insight here. Most people are familiar with e.g. epigenetics. But on the margin if people internalized this idea, maybe it would predispose us to new ways of studying biology. Maybe you would begin with the expectation that genomics (or expression studies) wouldn't necessarily have much to tell you about phenotype.
Engineering types that get into biology often want to study it in ways that are amenable to the tools they have for processing large volumes of data at scale. There isn't nothing to be gained from big sequencing studies or expression studies. But I am way more bullish on new knowledge creation -- big breakthroughs in some of the persistent mysteries like neuroscience -- from physicists studying biology, than from people with CS backgrounds.
In 2005, Yonghua Sun replaced the nucleus of a fertilized egg cell from one species of fish with the nucleus of a close relative species. The fish developed and exhibited a phenotype that was sort of half way between the two species [149]. If DNA is the information content that defines an organism, this is a weird result! You'd expect the fish to look like the DNA donor species. Obviously the 3 dimensional egg cell itself contains a lot of information [151].
Noble develops this insight further to posit a theory of Biological Relativity: that "there is no global frame of causality in organisms" [160]. He encourages us to see DNA as a template that is selectively called upon and given meaning by the organism but not the prime mover; what it does (and how it is modified both chemically and morphologically) is influenced by the organism at all levels (cells, tissues, etc).
------
Maybe I'm selling this a bit short (and the book is more or less a big argument against a particular reductionist view of biology) but if I had to be reductionist and distill it down I think the message here is "DNA isn't as important as you think". One turn more of complexity gives you "DNA isn't the only information content reflected in the development of an organism".
Then it is reasonable to ask "so what?" There actually isn't some new biological insight here. Most people are familiar with e.g. epigenetics. But on the margin if people internalized this idea, maybe it would predispose us to new ways of studying biology. Maybe you would begin with the expectation that genomics (or expression studies) wouldn't necessarily have much to tell you about phenotype.
Engineering types that get into biology often want to study it in ways that are amenable to the tools they have for processing large volumes of data at scale. There isn't nothing to be gained from big sequencing studies or expression studies. But I am way more bullish on new knowledge creation -- big breakthroughs in some of the persistent mysteries like neuroscience -- from physicists studying biology, than from people with CS backgrounds.
August 1, 2025
Too much narrative and very few examples to illustrate why his theory explains the world better.
I found the narrative against the language of Neo-Darwinism not convincing at all.
He says DNA is not like "programming" but it is more like "musical score" because it does nothing until activated to do so. Well you can print programming code on a paper and it does nothing until it runs on the computer. A function does nothing until it's called. The code itself only works if it is in the right context, a computer that uses a given architecture. A line of code might depend on other lines of code in order to cause a desired effect. Anyway, the author spends way too much time on this play-with-words and it makes absolutely no difference in our ability to explain experiments.
He is against the distinction between "replicator" and "vehicle" because we inherit more than DNA. Well for multi-cellular organisms (like us) even if we inherit all the organelles of the egg, there is definitely a useful distinction between the digital information that gets transmitted with high fidelity and all the remaining information that gets lost (including our memories, sense of self, etc). I think replicator and vehicle are incredibly powerful words to describe that.
Would have much preferred to read an in-depth description of what actually gets inherited besides the DNA and what are the consequences of that.
I found the narrative against the language of Neo-Darwinism not convincing at all.
He says DNA is not like "programming" but it is more like "musical score" because it does nothing until activated to do so. Well you can print programming code on a paper and it does nothing until it runs on the computer. A function does nothing until it's called. The code itself only works if it is in the right context, a computer that uses a given architecture. A line of code might depend on other lines of code in order to cause a desired effect. Anyway, the author spends way too much time on this play-with-words and it makes absolutely no difference in our ability to explain experiments.
He is against the distinction between "replicator" and "vehicle" because we inherit more than DNA. Well for multi-cellular organisms (like us) even if we inherit all the organelles of the egg, there is definitely a useful distinction between the digital information that gets transmitted with high fidelity and all the remaining information that gets lost (including our memories, sense of self, etc). I think replicator and vehicle are incredibly powerful words to describe that.
Would have much preferred to read an in-depth description of what actually gets inherited besides the DNA and what are the consequences of that.
March 23, 2025
The Author starts with giving his audience an insight into the philosophical and scientific inconsistencies of the people of the old to make his case about biological evolution not being all what it is said to be as well.
He then goes on to clear up the basis of major biological terms and phenomenon so all his readers are on the same page as him.
And then at about chapter 6 we arrive at the crux of the book, Biological Relativity. By the time readers reach this chapter they are well aware of the terms and phenomenon necessary for understanding this concept.
The later chapters then provide experimental proofs of how there are various other theories and factors that absolutely need to be incorporated while talking about biological evolution.
And the best thing is, that the author articulates all this with clever writing, humour, and without sounding condescending at all!
Some pages are a bore and hard to understand but that is mainly because I as a reader, was new to all these concepts.
Overall 5/5 for execution.
He then goes on to clear up the basis of major biological terms and phenomenon so all his readers are on the same page as him.
And then at about chapter 6 we arrive at the crux of the book, Biological Relativity. By the time readers reach this chapter they are well aware of the terms and phenomenon necessary for understanding this concept.
The later chapters then provide experimental proofs of how there are various other theories and factors that absolutely need to be incorporated while talking about biological evolution.
And the best thing is, that the author articulates all this with clever writing, humour, and without sounding condescending at all!
Some pages are a bore and hard to understand but that is mainly because I as a reader, was new to all these concepts.
Overall 5/5 for execution.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 28, 2025
Bought as a hardback (now donated to a friend) and subsequently on Kindle so to take detailed notes on the arguments Prof. Noble presents as to why the reductionist philosophy of the 'DNA blueprint' in determining the developmental trajectory of organisms requires substantial revision.
Prof. Noble writes in a clear and straightforward manner gradually building (and recapitulating arguments in chapters) towards his hypothesis of biological relativism; that is (in brief) there is no privileged level of causation in biological systems. Like the author, I was (he still is) an electrophysiologist, and still have 'skin in the game' (to paraphrase Taleb) in my current position. The reading of this is an effort on my part to understand the arguments and their nuances, less to be convinced of the hypothesis (if the null is Neo-Darwinism - I'm rejecting ;-) )
Should be read by anyone and everyone working in the biological (and allied) sciences and be a standard text for students entering sixth-form (UK) / high-school (US) / undergraduate studies in the biological sciences.
Prof. Noble writes in a clear and straightforward manner gradually building (and recapitulating arguments in chapters) towards his hypothesis of biological relativism; that is (in brief) there is no privileged level of causation in biological systems. Like the author, I was (he still is) an electrophysiologist, and still have 'skin in the game' (to paraphrase Taleb) in my current position. The reading of this is an effort on my part to understand the arguments and their nuances, less to be convinced of the hypothesis (if the null is Neo-Darwinism - I'm rejecting ;-) )
Should be read by anyone and everyone working in the biological (and allied) sciences and be a standard text for students entering sixth-form (UK) / high-school (US) / undergraduate studies in the biological sciences.
June 5, 2022
I found this an engaging and well explained read. There was no prior knowledge required to understand the central concepts of the book which revolve around gene expression being a subject of the whole system of body and environment. To get there though there is a discussion of scale as applied in science - from the universe to sub-cellular levels, system organisation within the body, Darwinism and neo-Darwinism.
I found that the arguments as put forward made sense to me, but my only criticism was that I think there was possibly too much at the beginning of the book discussing some of the fundamentals e.g. scale. Perhaps this is because I came to this with a scientific background and the author wanted to make this a book that was accessible to everyone.
Definitely recommended to anyone with an interest in inheritance and genes, but maybe only if you don't already know a lot about the subject.
I found that the arguments as put forward made sense to me, but my only criticism was that I think there was possibly too much at the beginning of the book discussing some of the fundamentals e.g. scale. Perhaps this is because I came to this with a scientific background and the author wanted to make this a book that was accessible to everyone.
Definitely recommended to anyone with an interest in inheritance and genes, but maybe only if you don't already know a lot about the subject.
July 18, 2023
Alongside with biologists like John Dupre, this essay is a contribution to think about life from a system-network approach.
Contributing to break the strict mould of neo-Darwinism (although recognizing its merits), Noble attacks Dawking's selfish gene's theory without mercy aligning himself with the symbiogenesis of Lynn Margulis. The goal is to open and deepen our understanding of life processes getting us rid from reductionism.
The outcome is near to the nuanced position of John Dupre, the mind's phenomenological account of Evan Thompson (Mind in life), Maturama and Varela's life openness' perspective and even the mystic science of Enmanuelle Coccia (whose reading I strongly recommend).
These authors should be read if you find Noble discourse a bit swallow (in fact, he doesn't say nothing really new, but just shows how data challenges the dogmatic creed of some biologists).
Contributing to break the strict mould of neo-Darwinism (although recognizing its merits), Noble attacks Dawking's selfish gene's theory without mercy aligning himself with the symbiogenesis of Lynn Margulis. The goal is to open and deepen our understanding of life processes getting us rid from reductionism.
The outcome is near to the nuanced position of John Dupre, the mind's phenomenological account of Evan Thompson (Mind in life), Maturama and Varela's life openness' perspective and even the mystic science of Enmanuelle Coccia (whose reading I strongly recommend).
These authors should be read if you find Noble discourse a bit swallow (in fact, he doesn't say nothing really new, but just shows how data challenges the dogmatic creed of some biologists).
August 2, 2025
4.5
A book that I am grateful to have read prior to starting graduate program in genetics. I think that most serious molecular biologists likely understand on some level that biological relativity is a real phenomenon, yet it still seems that the most vocal among them have a hard time stepping outside of the hardline neo-Darwinist/reductionist paradigm. I hope that this will change (and the mounting evidence coming out in favor of a more integrative understanding of the relationship between molecular biology and evolutionary theory indicates that it will). I do think Noble unnecessarily prescribes neo-Darwinists a very narrow worldview that, thankfully, many no longer have (except the supremely obstinate Richard Dawkins), in order to make his argument stronger.
A book that I am grateful to have read prior to starting graduate program in genetics. I think that most serious molecular biologists likely understand on some level that biological relativity is a real phenomenon, yet it still seems that the most vocal among them have a hard time stepping outside of the hardline neo-Darwinist/reductionist paradigm. I hope that this will change (and the mounting evidence coming out in favor of a more integrative understanding of the relationship between molecular biology and evolutionary theory indicates that it will). I do think Noble unnecessarily prescribes neo-Darwinists a very narrow worldview that, thankfully, many no longer have (except the supremely obstinate Richard Dawkins), in order to make his argument stronger.
February 19, 2024
To me this is like the notebook of someone who has spent their whole life trying hard, both scientifically and philosophically, to figure out how life works. It's full of many valuable insights, and in many places offers great food for thought. But it's a work in progress, not a fine-tuned vision.
September 24, 2024
بهنظرم ایدهی جدید یا حتی قابلاعتنایی توی این کتاب وجود نداره. =)) جالب اینکه توی سرتاسر کتاب هم داره تاکید میکنه که در این کتاب قراره یه چیز جدید رو کسی تابهحال بهش توجه نکرده رونمایی کنم و فلان. 😆
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 27, 2023
Favorite book. Didn't know what evolution was until I read this.
August 16, 2025
Couldnt finish the book. Too much narrative and pointless stories. I hoped it would be kinda a music of life 2.0, cus that one was great.
February 25, 2017
In this book Oxford academic Denis Noble argues against reductionism generally and Neo-Darwinism, in particular. He promotes the idea of Biological Relativity which holds that there is no privileged level of causation with respect biological inheritance. Rather, there are multiple levels and modes of causation which affect biological traits in the individual and across generations.
Noble presents his argument in several stages, each carefully developed and footnoted. Non-biologists are likely to find the main text heavy going at times as Noble is making technical arguments which necessarily involve biological terminology. He does what he can to ensure that everything is presented gradually and as clearly as possible but the challenge remains. The general reader is advised to skim, if necessary, so as to be able to reach the later chapters, especially Chapter 9 The Relativity of Epistemology: The Meaning of it All.
In ways, it is disappointing that a book like this needs to be written. The survival of rigid reductionist thinking is difficult to understand. Neo-Darwinism has, as Noble suggests, become a faith for some, rather than a scientific perspective which responds rationally to new data and arguments. That said, Noble has done a thorough job of showing both why Neo-Darwinisn is inadequate and what a more fulsome mode of thought might comprise.
Dance to the Tune of Life is a book worth reading. Hopefully it will help move biological thinking forward in a significant way. And that, in turn, will help reduce reductionism in many areas of thought.
Noble presents his argument in several stages, each carefully developed and footnoted. Non-biologists are likely to find the main text heavy going at times as Noble is making technical arguments which necessarily involve biological terminology. He does what he can to ensure that everything is presented gradually and as clearly as possible but the challenge remains. The general reader is advised to skim, if necessary, so as to be able to reach the later chapters, especially Chapter 9 The Relativity of Epistemology: The Meaning of it All.
In ways, it is disappointing that a book like this needs to be written. The survival of rigid reductionist thinking is difficult to understand. Neo-Darwinism has, as Noble suggests, become a faith for some, rather than a scientific perspective which responds rationally to new data and arguments. That said, Noble has done a thorough job of showing both why Neo-Darwinisn is inadequate and what a more fulsome mode of thought might comprise.
Dance to the Tune of Life is a book worth reading. Hopefully it will help move biological thinking forward in a significant way. And that, in turn, will help reduce reductionism in many areas of thought.
Read
March 10, 2017577 N748 2017
October 1, 2020
Explain it to me clearly in words of six syllables.
I almost gave up several times, and this is not the first recent book I've read on DNA and evolution. I wish I could remember where I saw the recommendation for it. At any rate, I think the takeaway is that random mutations don't drive evolution, acquired characteristics can indeed be inherited, and genes are just templates for making proteins, not puppetmasters pulling our strings.
Evidently there is a ferment of research and theory going on in the world's biology labs, and most of what I learned in school is being reconsidered. Yay, science.
I almost gave up several times, and this is not the first recent book I've read on DNA and evolution. I wish I could remember where I saw the recommendation for it. At any rate, I think the takeaway is that random mutations don't drive evolution, acquired characteristics can indeed be inherited, and genes are just templates for making proteins, not puppetmasters pulling our strings.
Evidently there is a ferment of research and theory going on in the world's biology labs, and most of what I learned in school is being reconsidered. Yay, science.
May 2, 2017
This is an excellent book on the science of evolution. The author refreshingly writes as a scientist, rather than a dogmatic follower of a faith – whether religious or atheistic. The book is primarily aimed against Neo-Darwinism, which has dogmatically preserved its monopoly for much of the last century. The author attacks Neo-Darwinism on two fronts: he shows the limitations of Neo-Darwinism and how it cannot account for everything we see, and he outlines other forms of evolution that would supplement the Neo-Darwinian perspective. He carefully (and redundantly) supports the science of Neo-Darwinism, and his complaint is that while it is true, it is not complete. As a result, the author builds bridges toward the evolutionary views proposed by SJ Gould and others. As a Physicist, this is the first account of evolutionary science I have read that seems plausible. So, even though my theistic viewpoint is radically opposed to the author, I applaud his scientific honesty and hope that evolutionary biologist continue to pursue their field beyond the constraints of Neo-Darwinism.
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews