What do you think?
Rate this book
Evolution for Naturalists: The Simple Principles and Complex Reality
280 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1980
1 person is currently reading
2 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
September 27, 2024
EVOLUTION DESCRIBED IN "PLAIN WORDS," RATHER THAN "MATHEMATICALLY"
At the time this book was published in 1980, Philip Darlington was Professor of Zoology, Emeritus, at the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University. He also wrote 'Zoogeography, and Biogeography of the Southern End of the World: Distribution and History of Far-Southern Life and Land, With an Assessment of Continental Drift.'
He wrote in the Preface, "This book is about organic evolution---the evolution of life on earth. It is intended as a reasonably complete, readable description and assessment of the theory of evolution as it stands now. I want to describe organic evolution in plain words rather than mathematically, relate it to other processes of directional change ... and at the same time reassess current theories of it so critically as to have some chance of correcting old errors and discovering new things about it."
He adds, "What is a naturalist? One definition is; a person who sees nature... I shall, here, look at evolution from three points of view. The first is that of a naturalist concerned with what we see, or ought to see, around us. The second is that of a professional or academic biologist... wanting to keep up to date without losing a realistic sense of proportion. And the third is that of a human being... appalled by the problems we face, and wanting to put them into useful perspective."
He notes, "One more point about analogies, whether verbal or mathematical: they are aids to understanding, but no matter how pertinent and striking they may be, they are NOT EVIDENCE; they tell us what to look for, but not what we will necessarily find when we look." (Pg. 39)
He argues, "It is easier and safer to make mathematical models than to attempt to study evolution in the real world: easier to make an equation or program a computer than to measure factors affecting evolution in nature, and safer because... a mathematical treatment almost guarantees a result that can be published whether it is right or wrong, while an attempt to analyze a real situation may end in frustration and failure to reach any publishable conclusion at all...
"In practice, cases should always be formulated conceptually and verbally before they are quantified and treated mathematically... if adaptations evolving by selection in natural populations are so numerous, complex, costly, and slow, and if environments are so complex and change so rapidly that most organisms most of the time are far from perfectly adapted... the assumption routinely made by mathematical evolutionists that selection must have 'maximized' such things as reproductive strategies, foraging patterns, and (especially!) social behaviors is wrong. And if the assumption is wrong, a large part of recent, 'sophisticated,' evolutionary mathematics is wrong---widely divorced from reality." (Pg. 42-43)
He observes, "Stabilizing selection... has been observed by naturalists since Darwin's time but no examples of directional selection in wholly natural situations were known to Darwin. Some are known now, but most of them are inferred rather than directly observed, or occur in experimentally manipulated populations. The inferences and experiments are ... in fact conclusive, but naturalists would like to be able to see directional selection occurring in entirely natural situations untouched by man, and the cases thus far described are very few." (Pg. 99-100)
He points out, "Man differs from most mammals and from all other primates in his nakedness. This fact suggests that our nakedness is recent, and other evidence supports this suggestion: the human foetus is well furred, but usually sheds its furry coat before birth; and the skin of adult humans is still covered with hairs... but the human hairs are so short and fine as to be hardly noticeable, except where specially developed. This is strong evidence that our ancestors had a coat of hair and that they 'chose' to decrease the quality of the coat but have not disposed of it during evolution." (Pg. 202-203)
Although 45 years old, this book may interest students of evolutionary theory.
At the time this book was published in 1980, Philip Darlington was Professor of Zoology, Emeritus, at the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University. He also wrote 'Zoogeography, and Biogeography of the Southern End of the World: Distribution and History of Far-Southern Life and Land, With an Assessment of Continental Drift.'
He wrote in the Preface, "This book is about organic evolution---the evolution of life on earth. It is intended as a reasonably complete, readable description and assessment of the theory of evolution as it stands now. I want to describe organic evolution in plain words rather than mathematically, relate it to other processes of directional change ... and at the same time reassess current theories of it so critically as to have some chance of correcting old errors and discovering new things about it."
He adds, "What is a naturalist? One definition is; a person who sees nature... I shall, here, look at evolution from three points of view. The first is that of a naturalist concerned with what we see, or ought to see, around us. The second is that of a professional or academic biologist... wanting to keep up to date without losing a realistic sense of proportion. And the third is that of a human being... appalled by the problems we face, and wanting to put them into useful perspective."
He notes, "One more point about analogies, whether verbal or mathematical: they are aids to understanding, but no matter how pertinent and striking they may be, they are NOT EVIDENCE; they tell us what to look for, but not what we will necessarily find when we look." (Pg. 39)
He argues, "It is easier and safer to make mathematical models than to attempt to study evolution in the real world: easier to make an equation or program a computer than to measure factors affecting evolution in nature, and safer because... a mathematical treatment almost guarantees a result that can be published whether it is right or wrong, while an attempt to analyze a real situation may end in frustration and failure to reach any publishable conclusion at all...
"In practice, cases should always be formulated conceptually and verbally before they are quantified and treated mathematically... if adaptations evolving by selection in natural populations are so numerous, complex, costly, and slow, and if environments are so complex and change so rapidly that most organisms most of the time are far from perfectly adapted... the assumption routinely made by mathematical evolutionists that selection must have 'maximized' such things as reproductive strategies, foraging patterns, and (especially!) social behaviors is wrong. And if the assumption is wrong, a large part of recent, 'sophisticated,' evolutionary mathematics is wrong---widely divorced from reality." (Pg. 42-43)
He observes, "Stabilizing selection... has been observed by naturalists since Darwin's time but no examples of directional selection in wholly natural situations were known to Darwin. Some are known now, but most of them are inferred rather than directly observed, or occur in experimentally manipulated populations. The inferences and experiments are ... in fact conclusive, but naturalists would like to be able to see directional selection occurring in entirely natural situations untouched by man, and the cases thus far described are very few." (Pg. 99-100)
He points out, "Man differs from most mammals and from all other primates in his nakedness. This fact suggests that our nakedness is recent, and other evidence supports this suggestion: the human foetus is well furred, but usually sheds its furry coat before birth; and the skin of adult humans is still covered with hairs... but the human hairs are so short and fine as to be hardly noticeable, except where specially developed. This is strong evidence that our ancestors had a coat of hair and that they 'chose' to decrease the quality of the coat but have not disposed of it during evolution." (Pg. 202-203)
Although 45 years old, this book may interest students of evolutionary theory.
Displaying 1 of 1 review