This book critically examines Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection. In this book, the authors argue that natural selection cannot be the sole mechanism driving evolution. They suggest that certain traits in organisms are linked, making it challenging to determine which specific traits are favored by natural selection. This critique has sparked significant debate within the scientific community, with many defending the foundational principles of Darwinian evolution.
Additionally, this presents arguments from four different schools of thought on evolution, aiming to clearly define the terms of the debate.
Their argument does not dispute the occurrence of evolution but questions the fundamental mechanism of natural selection as the primary driver of evolutionary change.
Key Arguments
1. The Problem of Selection-for vs. Selection-of
The authors argue that natural selection cannot be the sole explanation for evolutionary change because it assumes that organisms are selected for specific traits rather than as a whole. They suggest that many traits are correlated due to developmental and genetic constraints, making it difficult to determine which traits are actually selected for survival advantages.
2. Constraints on Evolution
Fodor and Piattelli-Palmarini highlight how certain biological constraints—such as physical laws, genetic linkages, and internal structures—can shape evolution independently of natural selection. They argue that many evolutionary changes occur due to internal biological processes rather than competitive adaptation.
3. Philosophical Objections
The book also delves into philosophical challenges to natural selection. The authors argue that the theory lacks a clear causal mechanism for distinguishing between traits that are selected versus those that merely come along as a byproduct (spandrels). This, they claim, weakens the explanatory power of Darwinian evolution.
Conclusion
While the book raises thought-provoking questions about the complexity of evolution, its arguments may have largely been rejected by mainstream biologists. Nevertheless, it serves as an interesting philosophical critique of Darwinian natural selection and contributes to ongoing discussions in evolutionary biology.