الملخص
The nineteenth century neuroscience studied the instinct of animal to understand the human mind. In particular, it has been found that the inheritance of unconscious behavior like instinct is mediated through ganglion chains, such as the spinal cord or sympathetic nervous system, which control unconscious reflexes. At the same time, the theory of Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics (hereafter ‘IAC’) widely known as Lamarck's evolutionary theory provided the theoretical frame on the origin of instinct and the heredity of action that the parental generation's habits were converted into the nature of the offspring generation. Contrary to conventional knowledge, this theory was not originally invented by Lamarck, and Darwin also did not discard this theory even after discovering the theory of natural selection in 1838 and maintained it throughout his intellectual life. Above all, in the field of epigenetics, the theory of ‘IAC’ has gained attention as a reliable scientific theory today. Darwin discovered crucial errors in the late 1830s that the Lamarck version's theory of ‘IAC’ did not adequately account for the principle of the inheritance of unconscious behavior like instinct. Lamarck's theory regarded habits as conscious and willful acts and saw that those habits are transmitted through the brain to control conscious actions. Lamarck's theory could not account for the complex and elaborate instincts of invertebrate animals, such as brainless ants. Contrary to Lamarck's view, Darwin established the new theory of ‘IAC’ that could be combined with contemporary neurological theory, which explains the heredity of unconscious behavior. Based on the knowledge of neurology, Darwin was able to translate the ‘principle of habit’ into a neurological term called ‘principle of reflex’. This article focuses on how Darwin join the theory of ‘IAC’ with nineteenth century neuroscience and how the neurological knowledge from the nineteenth century contributed to Darwin's overcoming of Lamarck's ‘IAC’. The significance of this study is to elucidate Darwin's notion of ‘IAC’ theory rather than natural selection theory as a principle of heredity of behavior. The theory of ‘IAC’ was able to account for the rapid variation of instincts in a relatively short period of time, unlike natural selection, which operates slowly in geological time spans of tens of millions of years. The nineteenth century neurological theory also provided neurological principles for ‘plasticity of instinct,’ empirically supporting the fact that all nervous systems responsible for reflexes respond sensitively to very fine stimuli. However, researchers of neo-Darwinian tendencies, such as Richard Dawkins and evolutionary psychologists advocating the ‘selfish gene’ hypothesis, which today claim to be Darwin's descendants, are characterized by human nature embedded in biological information, such as the brain and genes, so that it cannot change at all. This study aims to contribute to reconstructing the evolutionary discourse by illuminating Darwin's insights into the “plasticity of nature” that instincts can change relatively easily even at the level of invertebrates such as earthworms.
الموضوعات
Animals , Humans , Ants , Brain , Epigenomics , Ganglion Cysts , Heredity , Human Characteristics , Instinct , Invertebrates , Nervous System , Neurology , Neurosciences , Oligochaeta , Parents , Psychology , Reflex , Selection, Genetic , Spinal Cord , Sympathetic Nervous System , Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation , Willsالملخص
Resumen Este artículo realiza una revisión de los estudios sobre el evolucionismo en España y actualiza los conocimientos sobre el mismo tras los trabajos de Thomas Glick, la obra más filosófica de Diego Núñez y las aportaciones en los últimos años de la red latinoamericana de historia de la biología y la evolución, incidiendo en los aspectos más polémicos de la recepción de esta teoría. Incluye novedades como la identificación de los dibujos de El Museo Universal, siempre en discusión sobre su naturaleza lamarckiana o darwinista, el papel fundamental de la recepción de la obra de Haeckel en España frente a una recepción estrictamente darwiniana más débil, el papel jugado en la escuela histológica española y el impacto en la literatura.
Abstract This article re-examines the research on evolutionism in Spain and updates knowledge on this topic in light of the work of Thomas Glick, the more philosophical work of Diego Núñez and contributions in recent years from the Latin American network of historians of biology and evolution, who have dealt with the more polemical aspects of the reception of evolution theory. It includes new arguments, such as identification of the drawings in El Museo Universal, whose Lamarckian or Darwinian nature has been a subject of ongoing debate. It also covers the crucial role of the acceptance of Haeckel's work in Spain in comparison to the weaker support for a strictly Darwinian perspective, the role of the Spanish histology school, and the impact of evolutionism on literature.
الموضوعات
Humans , History, 19th Century , Biology/history , Science , Spain , History, 19th Century , Literature , Medicine , Anthropologyالملخص
Resumo Em 1868, Darwin publica seu livro The variation of animals and plants under domestication, no qual expõe sua teoria da hereditariedade. Nela se encontrava o pressuposto de que o desenvolvimento era fundamental para compreensão do processo evolutivo. No presente trabalho, é feita uma releitura da teoria darwiniana da pangênese, no intuito de rediscutir seu valor histórico. Conclui-se que a teoria da pangênese estava bem adequada a seu tempo e, mais do que isso, é possível encontrar ressonâncias de seu pressuposto em trabalhos das novas áreas biologia evolutiva do desenvolvimento (evo-devo) e epigenética.
Abstract In 1868, Darwin published his book The variation of animals and plants under domestication, which laid out his theory of heredity. This included the assumption that development was essential to understanding the evolutionary process. This present article reassesses the Darwinian theory of pangenesis in order to revisit its historical value. The conclusion is that the theory of pangenesis was well-suited to its time, and additionally, reflections of this assumption can be found in work in new areas known as evolutionary biology of development (evo-devo) and epigenetics.
الموضوعات
Humans , Biology , Epigenomicsالملخص
Apresenta uma abordagem histórica sobre conceitos gerais de especiação e seus mecanismos, a partir das ideias primordiais até as teorias mais recentes que visam elucidar a origem da biodiversidade. Sabe-se que especiação é um tema polêmico e complexo que abrange praticamente todas as linhas de pesquisa dentro da biologia, além da geologia e da paleontologia. O objetivo principal do artigo é clarificar os conceitos teóricos sobre a origem das espécies animais, na ordem cronológica em que foram estabelecidos, ao longo do desenvolvimento da biologia evolutiva como ciência.
This paper presents a historical approach on general concepts of speciation and its mechanisms, from the primordial ideas to the most recent theories that seek to elucidate the origin of biodiversity. It is common knowledge that speciation is a controversial and complex issue that encompasses virtually all the lines of research of biology, in addition to geology and paleontology. The main objective of the paper is to clarify the theoretical concepts on the origin of the animal species, in the chronological order in which they became established throughout the whole of the development of evolutionary biology as a science.
الموضوعات
Humans , Animals , Selection, Genetic , Biodiversity , Biological Evolutionالملخص
Este artigo visa examinar as referências a Charles Darwin (1809-1882) na obra freudiana buscando verificar qual o uso que Freud fez da teoria darwiniana e a que conceitos desta aludiu quando citou o nome do célebre evolucionista inglês. Assim, aborda-se o tema da influência de Darwin sobre Freud por meio de uma via mais evidente que, no entanto, foi pouco explorada. Essa abordagem mostra-se profícua, na medida em que fornece sólidas indicações de que o fundador da psicanálise buscou em Darwin não apenas subsídios conceituais a respeito da dinâmica anímica humana.
This article aims to examine the references to Charles Darwin (1809-1882) in the Freudian work seeking to evaluate which use Freud made of Darwin's theory and which concepts he referred to while citing Darwin's name. Thus, we deal with the theme of Darwin's influence on Freud by means of a more evident way that, however, was poorly explored. This approach reveals itself to be fruitful, in that it provides strong indications that the founder of psychoanalysis sought in Darwin not only conceptual tools in respect of the human psychic dynamics as well as a model for theorizing.
Este artículo examina las referencias a Charles Darwin (1809-1882) en la obra freudiana, a fin de verificar cual es el uso que hizo Freud de la teoría darwiniana y a qué conceptos de esta teoría se refería cuando mencionaba el nombre de Darwin. En consecuencia, el artículo aborda el tema de la influencia de Darwin en Freud por una vía más evidente que, sin embargo, ha sido poco explotada. Este abordaje se revela proficuo, pues provee sólidas indicaciones de que el fundador del psicoanálisis ha buscado en Darwin no solamente subsidios conceptuales respecto a la dinámica anímica sino también un modelo de teorizar.
الموضوعات
Freudian Theory , Psychoanalysisالملخص
Natural Theology is constructed around the analogy of a watchmaker, a metaphor borrowed from previous advocates of the design doctrine. Imagine, Paley suggests, that you are walking across a heath and suddenly encounter a watch lying on the ground. After close inspection of the watch, you would be compelled to conclude that such an intricate device could not have been constructed otherwise in order for it to work. It is only reasonable to assume “that the watch must have had a maker; that there must have existed, at some time and at some place or other, an artifi cer or artifi cers who formed it for the purpose which we fi nd it actually to answer; who comprehended its construction, and designed its use” (1802:3–4). In the case of living organisms Paley continued, the evidence for design is even stronger “in a degree which exceeds all computation” (1802:19), and he concluded: “The marks of design are too strong to be got over. Design must have had a designer. That designer must have been a person. That person is GOD” (1802:473). The efforts by Ray, Paley, and others to unite natural history with theology were among the inducements that inclined Darwin, at the age of eighteen, to look favourably on a career in the church. Sent by his father two years earlier to study medicine at Edinburgh University, Darwin had found himself uninspired by this profession and revolted by the sight of operations, which at that time were conducted without the benefi t of anesthesia. Worried that his son might turn into “an idle sporting man,” Darwin’s.