阿尔弗雷德·拉塞尔·华莱士的“纯粹达尔文主义”:对现代进化论的贡献

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 Q4 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Juan Manuel Rodríguez Caso
{"title":"阿尔弗雷德·拉塞尔·华莱士的“纯粹达尔文主义”:对现代进化论的贡献","authors":"Juan Manuel Rodríguez Caso","doi":"10.3989/asclepio.2020.25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"History tends to insist on remembering the case of Alfred Russel Wallace as one who, secondarily, supported Darwin’s proposal. For the purposes of this work it is presented what Wallace called in his work Darwinism (1889) the basic elements of ‘pure Darwinism’, which would serve as the basis for what George John Romanes would call Neodarwinism, based on both Wallace’s and August Weismann’s work. These elements include ideas that are commonly associated exclusively with Charles Darwin’s work, such as the biological concept of species, the different types of variation and their origin, the importance of natural selection as the preponderant mechanism to understand evolution, the rejection of Lamarckian mechanisms, among other points. From the above, the aims of this work are twofold: on the one hand, to rescue those basic concepts from Wallace’s pure Darwinism; and on the other, to establish some possible explanations as to why the idea persists that Wallace’s work does not seem to have been of importance for the development of Modern Synthesis.","PeriodicalId":44082,"journal":{"name":"Asclepio-Revista de Historia de la Medicina y de la Ciencia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"El “darwinismo puro” de Alfred Russel Wallace: aportaciones a la teoría evolutiva moderna\",\"authors\":\"Juan Manuel Rodríguez Caso\",\"doi\":\"10.3989/asclepio.2020.25\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"History tends to insist on remembering the case of Alfred Russel Wallace as one who, secondarily, supported Darwin’s proposal. For the purposes of this work it is presented what Wallace called in his work Darwinism (1889) the basic elements of ‘pure Darwinism’, which would serve as the basis for what George John Romanes would call Neodarwinism, based on both Wallace’s and August Weismann’s work. These elements include ideas that are commonly associated exclusively with Charles Darwin’s work, such as the biological concept of species, the different types of variation and their origin, the importance of natural selection as the preponderant mechanism to understand evolution, the rejection of Lamarckian mechanisms, among other points. From the above, the aims of this work are twofold: on the one hand, to rescue those basic concepts from Wallace’s pure Darwinism; and on the other, to establish some possible explanations as to why the idea persists that Wallace’s work does not seem to have been of importance for the development of Modern Synthesis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44082,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asclepio-Revista de Historia de la Medicina y de la Ciencia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asclepio-Revista de Historia de la Medicina y de la Ciencia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3989/asclepio.2020.25\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asclepio-Revista de Historia de la Medicina y de la Ciencia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3989/asclepio.2020.25","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

历史倾向于坚持把阿尔弗雷德·罗素·华莱士的例子作为一个次要的支持达尔文的提议的人来记住。为了这本书的目的,它提出了华莱士在他的著作《达尔文主义》(1889)中所说的“纯粹达尔文主义”的基本要素,这将成为乔治·约翰·罗曼斯所称的新达尔文主义的基础,这是基于华莱士和奥古斯特·魏斯曼的著作。这些要素包括通常只与查尔斯·达尔文的著作相关的观点,如物种的生物学概念、不同类型的变异及其起源、自然选择作为理解进化的主要机制的重要性、对拉马克机制的拒绝等等。由此可见,本书的目的是双重的:一方面,将这些基本概念从华莱士的纯达尔文主义中拯救出来;另一方面,建立一些可能的解释,以解释为什么人们坚持认为华莱士的工作似乎对现代综合理论的发展并不重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
El “darwinismo puro” de Alfred Russel Wallace: aportaciones a la teoría evolutiva moderna
History tends to insist on remembering the case of Alfred Russel Wallace as one who, secondarily, supported Darwin’s proposal. For the purposes of this work it is presented what Wallace called in his work Darwinism (1889) the basic elements of ‘pure Darwinism’, which would serve as the basis for what George John Romanes would call Neodarwinism, based on both Wallace’s and August Weismann’s work. These elements include ideas that are commonly associated exclusively with Charles Darwin’s work, such as the biological concept of species, the different types of variation and their origin, the importance of natural selection as the preponderant mechanism to understand evolution, the rejection of Lamarckian mechanisms, among other points. From the above, the aims of this work are twofold: on the one hand, to rescue those basic concepts from Wallace’s pure Darwinism; and on the other, to establish some possible explanations as to why the idea persists that Wallace’s work does not seem to have been of importance for the development of Modern Synthesis.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
50.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
53 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信