TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY
ESSAY
by discipline
"Concepts of modern natural science"
on the topic:
"Alternative evolutionary theories: Lamarckism, catastrophism,
saltationism.
Synthetic theory of evolution"
Performed: student gr. E-118
Yandubaeva Galya
Checked:
1. Alternative evolutionary theories
Lamarckism
The first holistic doctrine of the evolutionary development of living nature, the main ideas of which were outlined by J. B. Lamarck in the "Philosophy of Zoology" (1809).
At the heart of Lamarckism lies the idea of gradation - the internal "striving for perfection" inherent in all living things; the action of this evolutionary factor determines the development of living nature, a gradual but steady increase in the organization of living beings - from the simplest to the most perfect. The result of gradation is the simultaneous existence in nature of organisms of varying degrees of complexity, as if forming a hierarchical ladder of beings. Gradation is easily traced when comparing representatives of large systematic categories of organisms (for example, classes) and on organs of paramount importance. Considering gradation to be a reflection of the main trend in the development of nature, planted by the “supreme creator of all things,” Lamarck tried to give this process a materialistic interpretation: in a number of cases, he associated the complication of organization with the action of fluids (for example, caloric, electricity) penetrating into the body from the external environment. Another factor in evolution, according to Lamarck, is the constant influence of the external environment, which leads to a violation of the correct gradation and determines the formation of the whole variety of adaptations of organisms to environmental conditions. Environmental change is the main cause of speciation; while the environment is unchanged, the species remain constant; if there is a shift in it, the views change. Lamarck consciously distinguished between these factors of evolution, noting that the first of them in the organism correspond to "permanent abilities", the second - "abilities that are subject to change under the influence of circumstances."
The external environment affects plants and lower animals, devoid of a differentiated nervous system, directly, causing adaptive changes in them. Animals with a nervous system are indirectly influenced by the environment, their evolutionary transformations are carried out in a more complex way. Any significant change in external conditions leads to a change in the needs of animals living in the area. Changing needs entails changing habits to meet those needs. Changing habits leads to increased use of some organs and disuse of others. More often, functioning organs are strengthened and developed, while those that are not used weaken and disappear. The resulting functional and morphological changes are inherited, offspring, intensifying from generation to generation. Thus, according to Lamarck, the function plays a leading role in the evolutionary transformations of organisms: a change in form is a consequence of a change in function. The provisions on the exercise and non-exercise of organs and on the inheritance of acquired characteristics were elevated by Lamarck to the rank of universal laws of evolution. The failure of both "laws" was proved experimentally already at the end of the 19th century and especially at the beginning of the 20th century thanks to the discoveries of genetics. In his later works (1815, 1820), Lamarck brings both factors of evolution closer together to a large extent. He is inclined to consider the environment not only as a force that violates the straightness of gradation, but also as the main factor in evolution. Accordingly, he connects the origin of the main branches of the genealogical tree of organisms with the influence of specific conditions of existence.
Justifying his doctrine, Lamarck relied on the following facts:
the presence of varieties that occupy an intermediate position between the two species;
difficulties in diagnosing related species and the presence in nature of many “doubtful species”;
change in species forms during the transition to other ecological and geographical conditions;
cases of hybridization, especially interspecific.
Lamarck also considered important evidence for the transformation of species to be the discovery of fossil forms, changes in animals during domestication and plants when introduced into culture. Developing ideas about evolution, he came to the conclusion that there are no real boundaries between species and to the denial of the very existence of species. The observed gaps in the natural series of organic forms (which makes it possible to classify them) are only apparent violations of a single continuous chain of organisms, due to the incompleteness of our knowledge. Nature, in his opinion, is a continuous series of changing individuals, and taxonomists only artificially, for the sake of convenience of classification, divide this series into separate systematic groups. Such an idea of the fluidity of species forms was in logical connection with the interpretation of development as a process devoid of any breaks and jumps (the so-called flat evolutionism). This understanding of evolution was consistent with the denial of the natural extinction of species: fossil forms, according to Lamarck, did not die out, but, having changed, continue to exist in the guise of modern species. The existence of the lowest organisms, as if contradicting the idea of gradation, is explained by their constant spontaneous generation from inanimate matter. According to Lamarck, evolutionary changes usually cannot be directly observed in nature only because they occur very slowly and are incommensurate with the relative brevity of human life.
Lamarck extended the principle of evolution to the origin of man, although under the prevailing creationism he was forced to disguise his beliefs. He believed that man descended from monkeys. Among the factors in the formation of man, he attributed the transition to upright posture and the emergence of speech. Lamarck historically approached the highest manifestations of life activity - consciousness and the human psyche, linking their emergence with the evolution of the nervous system and its higher department - the brain.
Without giving an explanation of organic expediency and without revealing the true cause of evolutionary development, Lamarck for the first time proclaimed the principle of evolution as a universal law of living nature. Throwing down a bold challenge to the then prevailing ideas about the constancy of species, he was one of the first to make the problem of evolution the subject of a special study, a special area of biological research. That is why Lamarck deserved the high appraisal of the classics of Marxism.
Lamarckism did not receive recognition from contemporaries and after the death of its creator was forgotten. The revival of Lamarckism in the form of neo-Lamarckism occurred in the last third of the 19th century as a reaction to the spread of Darwinism.
According to Darwin, natural selection is the driving force behind evolution. That is, simple organisms are gradually turning into more complex and well adapted for life on Earth by improving their gene pool. This is achieved through the extinction of weak and incapable of adapting creatures. Those beings remain alive, in which more perfect qualities prevail.
This theory is currently taken as a basis and is dominant in science. However, not everyone agrees with her. Both before Darwin and after him, there were many people who held completely different views on the development of life on Earth. At the same time, alternatives to Darwinian evolution are no less interesting and plausible. This can be easily verified by reading the material below.
Charles Robert Darwin (1809-1882)
Ancient Greek philosopher Anaximander
(610-547 BC)
Anaximander was a representative of the Milesian school. It was he who first formulated the law of conservation of matter. This respected person in Greece expressed the opinion that in the beginning the Earth was a formless matter called apeiron. Subsequently, it took shape, and plants and animals emerged from the soil. The very first were fish. It is from them that people arose.
Arabic theologian Al-Jahiz
(775-868)
Al-Jahiz sincerely believed that God created life, and that it was by his will that all life on Earth exists. At the same time, he believed that the Almighty gave only the initial impetus, and then existence developed in accordance with natural factors and the struggle for survival. As a result of this, living beings changed and more and more adapted to the world around them. That is, the views of the Arab theologian to a certain extent coincided with the evolution of Darwin.
Swedish naturalist Carl Linnaeus
(1707-1778)
Carl Linnaeus is still highly respected in Sweden. He was a member of the Swedish and Parisian Academies of Sciences. It was with his participation that the Latin binomial nomenclature was created and with its help thousands of species of animals and plants were classified. As for the development of life on Earth, the Swedish scientist believed that the biblical flood described in the Bible was true.
He believed that all life was created on a huge mountainous island located at the equator. Over time, the water receded, and animals spread across the planet. Then came the global flood, and all living beings gathered on Mount Ararat. And after the flood they returned to their habitats again. That is, in this case there was no evolution and natural selection. Complex living organisms were created from the beginning and remained unchanged all the time.
French naturalist Georges-Louis Leclerc
(1707-1788)
Georges-Louis Leclerc believed that all living organisms were created at the North Pole. From there they spread all over the planet. In his opinion, this was more plausible than the equator or Mount Ararat. At the same time, the French scientist argued that living organisms underwent changes over time. True, this happened not as a result of natural selection, but under the influence of organic components of the environment. Leclerc designated them as some kind of organic particles that, once in the body, transformed it.
French naturalist
Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829)
Jean-Baptiste Lamarck was the first who tried to create a theory of evolution that explains everything. He drew attention to the fact that living beings have organs that regularly perform some kind of action, and there are rudimentary organs that have long lost their basic meanings. Regularly involved organs are passed on to offspring and are constantly evolving. This is what evolution is based on. This hypothesis is called Lamarckism.
All these alternatives to Darwinian evolution were created before Darwin himself, who lived in 1809-1882. However, after Darwin's theory was officially recognized, it had opponents. This was especially pronounced in the last century, when such concepts as genes, proteins and the DNA molecule appeared in science.
English ethologist Richard Dawkins
(70s of XX century)
Richard Dawkins has written books called The Selfish Gene and The Extended Phenotype. In his writings, this scientist stated that in the body each gene constantly competes with other genes, that is, we can talk about the process of survival at the gene level. In addition, genes come into conflict with the environment and other living organisms. It is in this ongoing struggle that evolution lies.
Japanese biologist Motoo Kimura
(70s of XX century)
Motoo Kimura created neutral theory of molecular evolution. Its main postulate is that some changes occurring in organisms in the course of evolution are absolutely neutral and do not improve the struggle of a living system for existence in any way. Hence, mutations arise that have neither disadvantages nor advantages. However, they are constantly observed in any population due to genetic drift. Therefore, it can be argued that an organism is never entirely the result of natural selection.
American paleontologists Niels Eldridge and Stephen Gould
(70s of XX century)
Niels Eldridge and Stephen Gould put forward punctuated equilibrium theory. According to Darwin, the process of evolution is slow, and different types of animals gradually accumulate new qualities in order to then move on to a new, more complex stage of evolutionary development. The Americans, on the other hand, said that life remains stable for a long time, and then, under the influence of certain factors, there is a jump, and completely different species appear.
This to some extent explains the mass extinction of ancient animal species and the emergence of completely different living beings. Such rapid transformations have been recorded on the planet several times. For example, dinosaurs lived for tens of millions of years without changing at all, and then rapidly died out, and their place was taken by completely different species and classes, radically different from the huge foot-and-mouth disease.
Punctuated equilibrium is considered by many scientists to be an excellent addition to Darwin's theory.. It fits perfectly into the paleontological history of the Earth and explains a lot. However, let's not rush things: science is constantly evolving and new discoveries are being made. Who knows, maybe in the future there will be such alternatives to Darwinian evolution that will completely refute the scientific calculations of the venerable meter. As a result, it turns out that evolution and natural selection are completely different processes and have nothing in common with those that are taken as the basis now.
No other scientific theory is as controversial as the theory of evolution. According to a recent poll, only 15% of people believe that Homo sapiens evolved by accident.
Therefore, even today there are more and more new theories of how mankind has developed and will develop. In our review of the 10 most popular alternative theories of evolution.
1. Intelligent design
The founders of the theory of intelligent design are American mathematician and philosopher Willian Dembski and biochemist Michael Behom.
Some things are too complex to evolve by chance, they argue, so instead of assuming that humans are just a slightly more evolved ape, you should “start looking for the celestial equivalent of Steve Jobs.”
In other words, life on Earth arose as a result of the intervention of some higher intelligence.
2. Morphic resonance
While most of the world is arguing about evolution in biology, Rupert Sheldrake decided to look at the origin of species from the point of view of the universe.
According to his theory, over time, invisible morphic fields are formed that contain the collective memory of organisms and substances, including stars and galaxies. This information field influences the subsequent development of similar species.
3.Christian Science
Christian Science is the theory that God is everywhere and everything around him is a part of him. This theory, Mary Baker Eddy argued, is based on the eternal truths contained in the Bible. This theory also states that nothing exists but the spirit, so everything around is an illusion.
4. Cosmic ancestors
The cosmic ancestry theory says that the universe has always existed, and life has always existed in it as well.
On Earth, life arose by being introduced by microbes from outer space. In the future, life evolved, imitating life in the universe.
5 Ancient Astronauts
According to the theory of intelligent design or cosmic heritage, aliens arrived on Earth millions of years ago and purposely gave rise to life here. Ancient texts, flying saucers, pyramids, the Mayan calendar, and so on are cited as evidence.
6. Progressive Creationism
The well-known story from the book of Genesis is that God created the Earth in six days, and rested on the seventh day. Progressive creationists claim that each of these "days" lasted millions of years.
7. Punctuated equilibrium
Of all the theories on this list, the theory of punctuated equilibrium is by far the most mainstream. As you know, all archaeological finds testify not to gradual evolution, but to the sudden appearance of species.
The theory of punctuated equilibrium states that all species are in stable equilibrium, which are interrupted by short periods of strong change.
8. Theistic evolutionism
Theistic evolutionism is the science that most of all combined Darwin's theory and God's creation of man. The idea is that God created the universe and everything in it, only he created everything according to scientific theory.
Therefore, evolution is one of the divine instruments in his experiments with creation.
9. Scientology
The religion, which was created on the basis of the belief system created by the American science fiction writer Ron Hubbard, claims that the human consciousness has gone from birds to sloths, and then monkeys and finally people.
Humans are the product of an alien race that died in a nuclear holocaust millions of years ago, and their consciousness was transferred from one animal to another until it entered the human brain. Feelings such as indecision, envy and toothache remained as a load of animal memories.
10 Creationism
Creationism claims that everything in Genesis is absolutely correct. Literally: God created the Earth and everything that is on it within six days, that we all descended from Noah and once there were giants
In addition, the Earth is only six thousand years old, so any geological and archaeological data is complete nonsense.
Behavior: an evolutionary approach Kurchanov Nikolai Anatolievich
2.2. Alternative theories of evolution
The variety of alternative concepts of evolution is usually grouped into three branches: Lamarckism, theories of directed evolution, and saltationism. Each branch has its own rich history. At present, these names are of rather historical interest, since all modern theories profess a synthetic approach. We will consider the stages of formation of each branch.
At the heart of all variations Lamarckism the principle of inheritance of acquired traits. Most of these variations are now part of history. Among the first theories, the theory of “psycholamarckism” by the American paleontologist E. Cope (1840–1897) became widely known, although in fact it is difficult to attribute it to Lamarckism, since it contains provisions from different directions. E. Cope actively criticized the theory of natural selection, supporting both the inheritance of acquired traits and the direction of evolution. He was the first to put forward a version of the irreducibility of the mechanisms of micro- and macroevolution. In the field of paleontology, E. Kop was considered the greatest specialist who discovered a number of fundamental regularities.
The assertion of the “central dogma” of genetics as the methodological basis of biology seemed to put an end to the problem of the inheritance of acquired traits forever, but the progress of immunology and the emergence of epigenetics returned it to the sphere of scientific debate again, reviving interest in the ideas of the repeatedly buried Lamarckism.
Theories of directed evolution proceed from the recognition in organisms of a predisposition to change in a certain direction. Such approaches began to appear almost simultaneously with the theory of Ch. Darwin, but they always represented a multitude of separate, very diverse currents.
Such well-known scientists as the German botanist K. Naegeli (1817–1891), the American paleontologist G. F. Osborn (1857–1935), and the German zoologist T. Eimer (1843–1898) stood at the origins of this trend. T. Eimer is the founder of an influential doctrine, called by him orthogenesis, within which he developed the idea of primordial expediency in nature, denying both the provisions of Lamarckism and the natural selection of Darwinism as the leading factors of evolution. Many proponents of orthogenesis took a vitalistic position.
Of the concepts of directed evolution, the most developed is the theory nomogenesis Russian ichthyologist L. S. Berg (1876–1950). Even principled opponents highly appreciated the author's erudition, the depth of his argumentation, and the harmony of the system (Dobzhansky Th., 1975). Currently, the term "nomogenesis" has become defining for the whole direction.
L. S. Berg attached secondary importance to natural selection as a “sorter of variations”. He gave the main role to another factor - the directed dynamics of evolutionary changes (Berg L. S., 1977). This dynamics is the realization of laws immanent to living nature. Thus, nomogenesis denies the randomness of evolutionary changes and postulates the course of evolution in a certain direction. This orientation is especially evident, according to L. S. Berg, is manifested in the phenomenon of convergence.
The theoretical views of L. S. Berg were shared by A. A. Lyubishchev (1890–1972), one of the last Russian “biologists-encyclopedists”. The theory of biogenesis of the Russian paleontologist D.N. Sobolev (1872–1949) is also close to them. D. N. Sobolev sought to build a table showing the evolutionary series of living beings. Paleobotanist S. V. Meyen (1935–1987) tried to create another version of such a table. For his attempts to combine STE and nomogenesis, he "received" criticism from both sides.
saltationism postulates the "jump-like" emergence of new forms through rare single mutations. The outstanding German embryologist R. Goldschmidt (1878–1958) can be considered the founder of this trend. His classic work Material foundations of evolution”occupies an honorable place among the fundamental scientific works of evolutionary biology (Goldschmidt R., 1940).
Saltationism well explains the main difficulty of Darwinism - the almost complete absence of intermediate forms. In his favor, discoveries in the field of molecular biology were interpreted, especially works showing the role of regulatory genes (Britten R., Davidson E., 1969). Mutations of regulatory genes are indeed able to cause rapid and significant changes (King M.-C., Wilson A., 1975).
The described groupings of alternative concepts are typical for the first half of the 20th century. In the second half of the XX century. attempts to distribute specific authors in these areas have always been artificial, since in their theoretical constructions scientists usually used a variety of ideas of evolutionism.
After a short period of undivided domination of STE, since the 1970s. a new round of confrontation begins under the sign of the ideas of synthesis. Increasingly, assertions begin to sound that the latest discoveries in the field of genetics, cytology, paleontology do not fit into the theoretical constructions of STE. The “reductionist” provisions of the STE about evolution as a change in the frequencies of alleles in a population, the universal role of natural selection, the absolutization of adaptability, as well as ignoring the structural and functional limitations in evolution, were sharply criticized.
The emergence of the theory punctuated balance, proposed in 1972 by American paleontologists S. Gould (1941–2002) and N. Eldredge (Gould S., Eldredge N., 1977; Gould S., 1982), provoked a new round of discussion. The theory was successful and found numerous adherents.
According to the punctuated equilibrium model, evolution is an alternation of sharp short jumps, when speciation occurs, with long periods of a stable state - stasis. The supporters of the new direction assigned an important role to the differentiation between the mechanisms of micro- and macroevolution, once again emphasizing that intrapopulation variability does not lead to speciation. The authors rightly pointed out the weak exchange of genes between populations of the species. They attached key importance to changes in regulatory genes in the process of speciation. Subsequent studies by geneticists have confirmed the validity of this position. Within the framework of the theory of punctuated equilibrium, the concept of species selection was developed as one of the main factors of macroevolution, which characterizes the balance of emerging and endangered species (Stanley S., 1979).
Almost simultaneously, the concepts of "non-Darwinian" evolution proposed by molecular geneticists arise (Ono S., 1973; Kimura M., 1985). True, their authors did not reject Darwinism, but considered their theories as its development and analysis at the molecular level. The theory of neutrality by M. Kimura (1924–1994) postulates the neutral nature of most mutations. Only some mutations are beneficial or harmful, and therefore subject to natural selection. Disputes around the "specific weight" of neutral mutations do not stop until now.
Even earlier, the English evolutionist W. Wynn-Edwards (1906–1997) put forward the theory group selection, according to which the group is the object of selection (Wynne-Edwards V., 1962). In STE, such an object is an individual. The birth of the theory was accompanied by heated discussions, but it did not meet with the support of most evolutionists. An interesting example of group selection advocates is the adaptive value for the group of the aging process, since it limits the size of the group and “cleanses” it of worn-out individuals.
Based on the theory of group selection, the same V. Winn-Edwards proposed the concept self-regulation- the ability of the group to regulate its size at the optimal level (Wynne-Edwards V., 1965). This concept was picked up by the opponents of STE as refuting the basic postulate of Darwinism about the tendency to unlimited reproduction and the struggle for existence. The extrapolation of the concept to human society had a special resonance. An analogy was drawn between our civilization and an overpopulated colony of bacteria, in which the mechanisms of the programmed death of individual individuals are activated in the interests of the survival of the rest (Oleskin A.V., 2001).
However, the most radical changes in views in evolutionary biology occurred at the end of the 20th century, after the discovery of epigenetic patterns and the prevalence of horizontal transfer in nature. The organization and functioning of the genetic apparatus of different organisms turned out to be much more diverse and complex than previously thought (Golubovsky M.D., 2000). The old "difficult" questions of evolutionary theory have taken on new urgency. These are the problems of the direction of evolution, the role of natural selection, the nature of adaptation, the reasons for the uneven pace of evolution, the incompleteness of the paleontological record, the extinction of large taxa at the boundary of geological epochs, and many others. All these problems stem from fundamental questions about the mechanisms of macroevolution, which cause sharp controversy. No less disputes are caused by the mechanisms of speciation and the very concept of a species.
Let us briefly consider some provisions of these sections of evolutionary theory.
From the book Unsolved Problems in the Theory of Evolution author Krasilov Valentin AbramovichChapter I GENERAL REMARKS ON THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION ...Further research should very significantly modify the current, including strictly Darwinian, ideas about the process of development of species. F. Engels.
From the book Biology [A complete guide to preparing for the exam] author Lerner Georgy IsaakovichTHEORIES ABOUT THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION Many misunderstandings arise from the inability to distinguish the general evolutionary approach from particular metaevolutionary problems and these latter from each other. When asked what is the difference between the theories of J. B. Lamarck and Charles Darwin, the majority answers: Lamarck
From the book Neanderthals [History of failed humanity] author Vishnyatsky Leonid BorisovichTHE SCIENCE OF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION Everyone has probably heard from time to time that there are no real theories in biology. In particular, evolutionism is denied the status of a genuine scientific theory for the following reasons.1. This is basically a description of all kinds of events, and
From the book The Logic of Chance [On the Nature and Origin of Biological Evolution] author Kunin Evgeniy ViktorovichCRITICISM OF THE SYNTHETIC THEORY OF EVOLUTION Not considering the criticism of the synthetic theory of evolution (STE) as a special task, I must nevertheless clarify my attitude towards the currently dominant views, otherwise it is difficult to count on the reader's sympathy for an attempt to change them. Below
From the book Evolution and Progress author Berdnikov Vladimir Alexandrovich From the book What if Lamarck is right? Immunogenetics and evolution author Steele Edward From the book Anthropology and Concepts of Biology author From the book Behavior: An Evolutionary Approach author Kurchanov Nikolai Anatolievich From the author's book From the author's bookChapter 1 Fundamentals of evolution: Darwin and the synthetic theory of evolution Per. A. Nadiryan This and the following chapters briefly describe the current state of evolutionary biology, as it was before 1995, when a new direction of science arose - comparative genomics.
From the author's bookChapter 2 From Synthetic Theory of Evolution to Evolutionary Genomics: Different Mechanisms and Paths of Evolution Per. A. Nesterova In this chapter, we will continue our discussion of evolutionary biology in the period before the advent of genomics. Many of the development directions discussed were not
From the author's bookChapter 9 Lamarckian, Darwinian and Wrightian regimes of evolution, the evolution of evolvability, the reliability of biological systems and the creative role of noise in evolution Per. D. TulinovaThe drama of LamarckismAs already noted in the preface to this book, one of the key achievements
From the author's bookChapter 1. Theories of Progressive Evolution Who knows that the spirit of man rises up, And the spirit of cattle goes down into the earth? Ecclesiastes, III, 21* Everyday anthropocentrism A person can remain indifferent to many things, but not to his own person. He is interested in himself
From the author's bookThe main provisions of the traditional neo-Darwinian theory of evolution Heredity Genetic material (DNA) can be passed on unchanged from generation to generation. MutationsSometimes persistent changes occur in DNA - mutations. Charles Darwin called these changes
From the author's book5.5. Alternative theories and synthesis of ideas of evolutionism Within the framework of scientific methodology, there is no alternative to evolutionism, since only creationism can serve as such an alternative. However, evolutionism itself is not a homogeneous current. Although after reading the popular
From the author's book2.1. Formation and main provisions of the synthetic theory of evolution Evolutionism arose as an alternative to the doctrine of the immutability of species. Questions related to the emergence and development of life have passed through the entire intellectual history of mankind. The amount of literature
In about alternative theories of evolution
It turns out that the popularization of scientific knowledge is a dangerous business. Dear mavr_alex says that he almost didn’t get it from his friends. For trying to carry the evolutionary doctrine to the masses. Therefore, I will continue to educate exclusively online. So at least you won't beat
I drew attention to the fact that the myth of Darwin's theory (aka Synthetic Theory, aka Neo-Darwinism) as the only scientific theory of evolution has taken root in society. Like, either old Darwin, or creationism, or aliens, which are about nothing. And everything, the fourth is not given.
But in fact, theories of evolution are pretty fucked up. I will try to briefly talk about the most reasonable and popular today:
Neo-Lamarckism The most beloved, after Marxism-Leninism, of course, is the teaching of Comrade Stalin. There is nothing to say about the fiery Michurinist Trofim Denisovich Lysenko.
As early as the beginning of the 19th century, the great biologist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck suggested that the qualities that parents acquire through training are somehow transmitted to their offspring. For example, the ancestors of giraffes pulled-pulled their necks up. From this, each new generation was born with a slightly longer neck. And, voila, they turned out such cool giraffes.
In fact, this idea is not as absurd as it seems. There is a hereditary modification variability, which is often adaptive. When a very strong stress acts on a population, genetic changes sometimes occur in it, and offspring in a short time can acquire new qualities that allow them to better survive this stress.
It is not yet clear how much this mechanism affects speciation, but modern followers of neo-Lamarckism are sure that it still has an effect. However, there are fewer and fewer of them.
Orthogenesis. Well, or nomogenesis. This idea was developed, among other things, by the remarkable Soviet zoologist Lev Semyonovich Berg. Laureate of the Stalin Prize, by the way. The later Frankfurt constructional theory and the modern Theory of Autoevolution by Lima de Faria are very close to his conclusions.
The essence of the idea is that natural selection does not affect anything, hereditary variability is subject to certain laws and has a certain direction. There are a limited number of hereditary variations, and they go in certain directions.
Like, evolution is largely a deployment of already existing inclinations, and not a random process, as the Synthetic Theory interprets it. According to nomogenesis, the direction of evolution is generally largely “predetermined” by some initial properties of life.
If neo-Darwinists see the cause of evolution in divergence - the divergence of signs of organisms, then nomogenesis, on the contrary, consider convergence to be the basis of evolution, the process in which different organisms acquire the same signs.
It is clear that both of them have just carloads of supporting material. I won't even give examples, they are obvious.
saltationism. In principle, it is similar to Neo-Darwinism. Only the guys believe that the basis of evolutionary changes is not the accumulation of small mutations and small new traits associated with them. And mutations are large systemic. If saltationists are to be believed, speciation proceeds very quickly, literally in a few generations, and evolution is of a spasmodic nature. Accordingly, selection does not operate at the level of intraspecific struggle, as old man Darwin suggested, but at the level of interspecific struggle.
