Journal of Bioeconomics

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 71–96 | Cite as

Alternative evolutionary theories: A historical survey

Article

Abstract

Our overview has the objective of making our study relevant to bioeconomists. The need for the ‘alternatives’ to the Synthetic Theory of Evolution in social-economic studies was substantiated, for example, by Colombatto (Journal of Bioeconomics, 5, 1–25, 2003), who maintains that the natural-selection theory is ‘ill suited’ to describing evolutionary processes in economics. He proposed an alternative ‘non-Darwinian’ approach by equating the ‘non-Darwinian’ approach with a definite version of neo-Lamarckism. Yet, as we will show, there is a palette of alternative approaches within and beyond the neo-Lamarckism. We hope to give bioeconomists more choice in their theoretical modeling and constructing of analogies between biology and economics. It will also be shown that in the light of suggested definitions the concept of ‘universal Darwinism’ recently discussed in bioeconomics makes little sense as a generalizing category. In addition, in the concluding part of the paper we demonstrate that the majority of alternative approaches are far from being pigeonholed as archaic and once and for all wiped off the theoretical landscape. On the contrary, in recent years one can observe some revival of interest in the theoretical ‘heresies’.

Keywords

Alternative evolutionary theories Mutationism Saltationism Lamarckism Creationism Idealistic morphology Old-Darwinism Generalized Darwinism 

JEL Classification

10 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abel, O. (1928). Das biologische Trägheitsgesetz. Wien & Leipzig, Emil Haim & CoGoogle Scholar
  2. Balon E.K. (2001). Saltatory ontogeny and the life-history model: Neglected processes and patterns of evolution. Journal of Bioeconomics 3, 1–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balon E.K. (2004). Evolution by epigenesis: Farewell to Darwinism, neo- and otherwise. Rivista di Biologia/Biology Forum 97, 269–312Google Scholar
  4. Baumgart W. (2000). Blätter aus dem Naumann-Museum 19, 94–120Google Scholar
  5. Berg L., Lew S. (1922). Nomogenez. Petrograd, GIZ (in Russian)Google Scholar
  6. Berg, L., & Lew, S. (1926). Nomogenesis or evolution determined by law (2nd ed.), (1969). Constable, London. Cambridge & London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Berg Leo (Lew) S. (1977). Trudi po teorii evoluzii. Leningrad, Nauka, (in Russian)Google Scholar
  8. Beurlen K. (1930). Vergleichende Stammesgeschichte. Berlin, BorntraegerGoogle Scholar
  9. Böker H. (1924). Begründung einer biologischen Morphologie. Zeitschrift für Morphologie und Anthropologie 24, 1–22Google Scholar
  10. Böker, H. (1935/1937). Einführung in die vergleichende biologische Anatomie der Wirbeltiere (Vols. I, II). Jena: Gustav Fischer Verlag.Google Scholar
  11. Bowler P.J. (1983). The eclipse of Darwinism. Baltimore & London, The John Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  12. Bowler P.J. (1992). The non-Darwinian revolution. Baltimore & London, The Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  13. Bowler P.J. (2003). Evolution: The history of idea. Berkeley, University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  14. Bowler P.J. (2004). The specter of Darwinism: The popular image of Darwinism in early twentieth-century Britain. In: Lustig A., Richards R.J., Ruse M. (eds), Darwinian Heresies. New York, Cambridge University Press, pp. 48–68Google Scholar
  15. Breidbach O. (2003). Post-Haeckelian comparative biology: Adolf Naef’s idealistic morphology. Theory in Biosciences 122, 174–193Google Scholar
  16. Breidbach O., Ghiselin M.T. (2002). Lorenz Oken and Naturphilosophie in Jena, Paris and London. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 24, 219–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cairns J., Overbaugh J., Miller S. (1988). The origin of mutants. Nature 335, 142–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Colombatto E. (2003). Towards a non-Darwinian theory of institutional change. Journal of Bioeconomics 5, 1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Darwin C. (1859). The origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favored races in the struggle of life. London, MurrayGoogle Scholar
  20. Darwin C. (1883). The variation of animals and plants under domestication (Vol. 2, 2nd ed.). New York, D. Appleton & CoGoogle Scholar
  21. de Vries, H. (1901–1903). Die Mutationstheorie. Leipzig, Veit.Google Scholar
  22. Eimer, T. (1897). Orthogenesis der Schmetterlinge. Ein Beweis bestimmt gerichteter Entwickelung und Ohnmacht der natürlichen Zuchtwahl bei der Artbildung. Leipzig: Verlag von Wilhelm Engelmann.Google Scholar
  23. Ghiselin, M. T. (1969). The triumph of the Darwinian method. Berkeley: University of California Press (between others).Google Scholar
  24. Goldschmidt R.B. (1940). The material basis of evolution. New Haven, Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
  25. Goodwin B.C. (1984). Changing from an evolutionary to a generative paradigm in biology. In: Pollard J.W. (ed). Evolutionary theory: Paths into the future. Chichester, Wiley, pp. 99–120Google Scholar
  26. Gould S.J. (1977). Ontogeny and phylogeny. Cambridge, The Belknap Press of Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  27. Gould S.J. (2002). The structure of evolutionary theory. Cambridge, The Belknap Press of Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  28. Gudo M. (2001). The development of the critical theory of evolution: The scientific career of Wolfgang F. Gutmann. Theory in Biosciences 121(1): 101–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Guyénot E. (1921). Lamarckisme ou mutationnisme. Revue générale des Sciences (pures et appliquées). Tome 32, 598–606Google Scholar
  30. Haacke W. (1893). Gestalt und Vererbung. Eine Entwickelungsmechanik der Organismen. Leipzig, T.O. Weigel NachfolgerGoogle Scholar
  31. Haffer, J. (1995). Die Ornithologen Ernst Hartert und Otto Kleinschmidt: Darwinistische gegenüber typologischen Ansichten zum Artproblem. Mitteilungen des Zoologischen Museums Berlin (Suppl.) 71 Annalen der Ornithologie, 19, 3–25.Google Scholar
  32. Harlan, V. (Ed.) (2005). Wert und Grenzen des Typus in der botanischen Morphologie (pp. 31–52). Nümbrecht: Martina Galunder Verlag.Google Scholar
  33. Hodgson G.M. (2002). Darwinism in economics: From analogy to ontology. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 12, 259–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hodgson G.M., Knudson T. (2004). The firm as an interactor: Firms as vehicles for habits and routines. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 14, 281–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hoßfeld, U. (2000). Formenkreislehre versus Darwinsche Abstammungstheorie. Eine weltanschauliche-wissenschaftliche Kontroverse zwischen Otto Kleinschmidt (1870–1954) und Victor Franz (1883–1950). Anzeiger des Vereins Thüringer Ornithologen, 4, 1–26.Google Scholar
  36. Hoßfeld U. (2002). Konstruktion durch Umkonstruktion: Hans Bökers vergleichende biologische Anatomie der Wirbeltiere. Verhandlungen zur Geschichte und Theorie der Biologie 9, 149–169Google Scholar
  37. Hoßfeld U., Olsson L. (2002). From the modern synthesis to Lysenkoism, and back?. Science 297(5578): 55–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jablonka E., Lamb M.J. (1998). Epigenetic inheritance in evolution. Journal of Evolutionary Morphology 13, 159–183Google Scholar
  39. Junker T., Hoßfeld U. (2001). Die Entdeckung der Evolution: Eine revolutionäre Theorie und ihre Geschichte. Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche BuchgesellschaftGoogle Scholar
  40. Junker T. (2004). Die zweite darwinsche Revolution: Geschichte des synthetischen Darwinismus in Deutschland, 1924–1950. Marburg, Basilisken-PresseGoogle Scholar
  41. Kleinschmidt O. (1909). Zum Darwin Jubiläum. Falco 5, 6–8Google Scholar
  42. Kleinschmidt O. (1925). Die Formenkreislehre. Falco 21, 1–7Google Scholar
  43. Krumbein W.E., Schellnhuber H.-J. (1992). Geophysiology of mineral deposits—a model for a biological driving force of global changes through earth history. Terra Nova 4, 351–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kutschera U. (2004). Streitpunkt Evolution: Darwinismus und Intelligentes Design. Münster, LIT-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  45. Labbé A. (1937). Le conflit transformiste. coll. “Nouvelle collection scientifique”. Paris, Félix Alcan ÉditeurGoogle Scholar
  46. Le Dantec F. (1909). La crise du transformisme. Paris, Félix Alcan ÉditeurGoogle Scholar
  47. Levit, G. S. (2001). Biogeochemistry, biosphere, noosphere: The growth of the theoretical system of Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky (1863–1945). Verlag für Wiss. und Bildung, Berlin.Google Scholar
  48. Levit G.S., Hoßfeld U. (2005). Die Nomogenese: Eine Evolutionstheorie jenseits des Darwinismus und Lamarckismus. Verhandlungen zur Geschichte und Theorie der Biologie 11, 367–388Google Scholar
  49. Levit, G. S., & Hoßfeld, U. (2006). The forgotten “Old Darwinian” synthesis: The evolutionary theory of Ludwig H. Plate (1862–1937). NTM International Journal of History and Ethics of Natural Sciences, Technology and Medicine, 14, 9–25.Google Scholar
  50. Levit G.S., Krumbein W. (2007). Zur Diskussion der Symbiogenesetheorie unter sowjetischen Zoologen und Biologietheoretikern der ersten Hälfte des 20 Jh. In: Geus A., Höxtermann E. (eds). Evolution durch Kooperation—Zur Entstehung der Endosymbiose—Theorie in der Zellbiologie (pp. 477–503). Reprints und Kommentare, Marburg: Basilisken-Presse.Google Scholar
  51. Levit G.S., Meister K. (2006). The history of essentialism vs. Ernst Mayr’s “Essentialism Story”: A case study of German idealistic morphology. Theory in Biosciences 124(3–4): 281–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ljubistchev A.A. (1973). Darwinizm i nedarwinizm. Priroda 10, 44–47, (in Russian)Google Scholar
  53. Lovelock J. (1986). The biosphere. New Scientist 1517, 51Google Scholar
  54. Lovelock J. (1996). The Gaia hypothesis. In: Bunyard P. (ed). Gaia in action. Edinburgh, Floris Books, pp. 15–33Google Scholar
  55. Lovelock J., Margulis L. (1974). Atmospheric homeostasis by and for the biosphere: The Gaia hypothesis. Tellus 26, 2–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Margulis L. (1996). James Lovelock’s Gaia. In: Bunyard P. (ed). Gaia in action. Edinburgh, Floris Books, pp. 54–65Google Scholar
  57. Mayr E. (1980). Prologue: Some thoughts on the history of the evolutionary synthesis. In: Mayr E., Provine W.B. (eds). The evolutionary synthesis. Cambridge & London, Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  58. Mayr E. (1982). The growth of biological thought: Diversity, evolution and inheritance. Cambridge, The Belknap Press of Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  59. Mayr E. (1984). Die Entwicklung der biologischen Gedankenwelt. Berlin, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  60. Mayr E. (1999). Thoughts on the evolutionary synthesis in Germany. In: Junker T., Engels E.-M. (eds). Die Entstehung der Synthetischen Theorie: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Evolutionsbiologie in Deutschland. Berlin, Verlag für Wiss. und Bildung, pp. 19–30Google Scholar
  61. Mayr E., Linsley G.E., Usinger R.L. (1953). Methods and principles of systematic zoology. New York, McGraw HillGoogle Scholar
  62. McShea D.W. (2005). The evolution of complexity without natural selection, a possible large-scale trend of the fourth kind. Paleobiology 31(2): 146–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Meister K. (2005a). Metaphysische Konsequenz.—Die Idealistische Morphologie Edgar Daqués. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen 235(2): 197–233Google Scholar
  64. Meister, K. (2005b). Troll, W. (1897–1978)—Tradierung idealistischer Morphologie in den deutschen botanischen Wissenschaften des 20. Jahrhunderts. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 27, 221–247.Google Scholar
  65. Nordenskiöld E. (1928). The history of biology. New York, Tudor PublishingGoogle Scholar
  66. Nyhart L.K. (1995). Biology takes form: Animal morphology and the German universities, 1800–1900. Chicago, The University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  67. Olsson L. (2005). Alternatives to Darwinism in Sweden: Lamarckism and idealistic morphology, disbelief in mutations and the poverty of selection. Jahrbuch für Europäische Wissenschaftskultur 1, 47–60Google Scholar
  68. Plate L. (1913). Selektionsprinzip und Probleme der Artbildung: Ein Handbuch des Darwinismus. 4. Auflage. Leipzig & Berlin, Verlag von Wilhelm EngelmannGoogle Scholar
  69. Plate, L. (1932/33/38). Vererbungslehre: Mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Abstammungslehre und des Menschen. Bd. I: Mendelismus. (1932). Bd. II Sexualität und Allgemeine Probleme. 1933. Bd. III: Spezielle Genetik einiger Nager. 1938. Jena: Gustav Fischer Verlag.Google Scholar
  70. Popov, I. (2003). The concepts of directed evolution. In G. S. Levit, J. Popov, U. Hoßfeld, L. Olsson, & O. Breidbach (Eds.), In the shadow of Darwinism: Alternative evolutionary theories in the 20th century (pp. 26–48). St. Petersburg: Fineday Press (in Russian with English Abstract).Google Scholar
  71. Rabaud E. (1921). L’Hérédité. Coll. Paris, Armand ColinGoogle Scholar
  72. Reif W.-E. (1986). The search for a macroevolutionary theory in German palaeontology. Journal of the History of Biology 19, 79–130Google Scholar
  73. Reif W.-E. (1993). Afterword. In: Schindewolf O., Reif W.-E. (eds). Basic questions in palaeontology. Chicago, University Press, pp. 435–453Google Scholar
  74. Reif W.-E. (1998). Adolf Naefs idealistische Morphologie und das Paradigma typologischer Makroevolution. Verhandlungen der DGGTB 1, 411–424Google Scholar
  75. Rensch B. (1929). Das Prinzip geographischer Rassenkreise und das Problem der Artbildung. Berlin, BornträgerGoogle Scholar
  76. Rensch, B. (1980). Historical development of the present synthetic Neo-Darwinism in Germany. In E. Mayrm & W. B. Provine (Eds.), The evolutionary synthesis (pp. 284–302, p. 289). Cambridge & London.Google Scholar
  77. Riedl R. (2003). Riedls Kulturgeschichte der Evolutionstheorie: Die Helden, ihre Irrungen und Einsichten. Berlin, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  78. Schindewolf O.H. (1936). Paläontologie, Entwicklungslehre und Genetik. Kritik und Synthese. Berlin, BornträgerGoogle Scholar
  79. Schindewolf, O. H. (1947). Fragen der Abstammungslehre. Aufsätze u. Reden der senckenbergischen naturforschenden Gesellschaft 1. Frankfurt: Kramer.Google Scholar
  80. Schindewolf, O. H. (1950). Grundlagen der Paläontologie. Stuttgart: E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  81. Schindewolf, O. H. (1956). Zeugnisse der Vorzeit. Universität Tübingen 45, Reden bei der feierlichen Übergabe des Rektorates zu Beginn des Sommersemesters am 8. Mai 1956. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
  82. Schindewolf O.H. (1962). Neue Systematik. Palaeontologische Zeitschrift 36, 59–78Google Scholar
  83. Schindewolf O.H. (1964). Erdgeschichte und Weltgeschichte. Abh. Akad. Wiss. U. Lit., math.-nat. Kl. 2, 53–104Google Scholar
  84. Schindewolf, O. H. (1969). Über den “Typus” in morphologischer und phylogenetischer Biologie. Mainz: Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur.Google Scholar
  85. Steele E.J., Franklin A., Blanden R.V. (2004). Genesis of the strand biased signature in somatic hypermutation of rearranged immunoglobulin variable genes. Immunology and Cell Biology 82, 209–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Theißen, G. (2006). The proper place of hopeful monsters in evolutionary biology. Theory in Biosciences 3–4: 349–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Tort P. (ed). (1996). Dictionnaire du darwinime et de l’évolution (Vol. 2). Paris, Presses Universitaires de FranceGoogle Scholar
  88. Troll W. (1925). Gestalt und Gesetz. Flora N.F. 18/19: 536–565Google Scholar
  89. Troll W. (1928). Organisation und Gestalt im Bereich der Blüte. In: Beneke W., Seybold A., Sierp H., Troll W. (eds). Monographien aus dem Gesamtgebiet der wissenschaftlichen Botanik 1. Berlin, Springer.Google Scholar
  90. Troll W. (1937). Vergleichende Morphologie der höheren Pflanzen 1. Teil 1. Berlin, BornträgerGoogle Scholar
  91. Troll W. (1951). Biomorphologie und Biosystematik als typologische Wissenschaften. Studium Generale 4, 367–389Google Scholar
  92. Troll W. (1952). Über die Grundlagen des Naturverständnisses. Scientia 46, 11–18Google Scholar
  93. Vernadsky V.I. (1926). Biosfera. Leningrad, NHTIGoogle Scholar
  94. Vernadsky V.I. (1965). The chemical structure of the biosphere of the earth and of its environment. Moscow, Nauka (in Russian)Google Scholar
  95. Vernadsky V.I. (1994). Trudy po geokhimii. Moscow, Nauka (in Russian)Google Scholar
  96. Vernadsky, V. I. (1997). Scientific thought as a planetary phenomenon. Nongovernmental Ecological V. I. Moscow: Vernadsky Foundation.Google Scholar
  97. von Goethe, J. W. (1932). Selected papers. In W. Troll (Ed.), Goethes morphologische Schriften (Sonderausgabe). Jena: Eugen Diederichs.Google Scholar
  98. von Nägeli, C. (1884). Mechanisch-physiologische Theorie der Abstammungslehre. Verlag von R. Oldenbourg, München & Leipzig.Google Scholar
  99. Williams D.M., Ebach M.C. (2005). Drowning by numbers: Rereading Nelson’s “Nullius in Verba”. The Botanical Review 71(4): 355–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Wimsatt W.C., Schank J.C. (1988). Two constraints on the evolution of complex adaptations and the means for their avoidance. In: Nitecki M. (ed). Progress in evolution. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, pp. 213–273Google Scholar
  101. Zavarzin G.A. (1997). The rise of the biosphere. Microbiology 6(66): 603–611Google Scholar
  102. Zavarzin, G. A. (2003). Evolution of the geosphere-biosphere System. Priroda, 1, 27–35 (in Russian).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ernst-Haeckel-Haus//AG, BiologiedidaktikUniversität JenaJenaGermany
  2. 2.Förderverein Natura Miriquidica e.VNaturschutzstation PobershauPobershauGermany
  3. 3.AG BiologiedidaktikUniversität JenaJenaGermany

Personalised recommendations