Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gq7q9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T07:46:28.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evolutionary Theory in the 1920s: The Nature of the “Synthesis”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Sahotra Sarkar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper analyzes the development of evolutionary theory in the period from 1918 to 1932. It argues that: (i) Fisher's work in 1918 constituted a not fully satisfactory reduction of biometry to Mendelism; (ii) there was a synthesis in the 1920s but that this synthesis was mainly one of classical genetics with population genetics, with Haldane's The Causes of Evolution being its founding document; (iii) the most important achievement of the models of theoretical population genetics was to show that natural selection sufficed as a mechanism for evolution; and (iv) Haldane formulated a prospective evolutionary theory in the 1920s whereas Fisher and Wright formulated retrospective theories of evolutionary history.

Type
The Making of the Genetical Theory of Evolution
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 71 , Issue 5: Proceedings of the 2002 Biennial Meeting of The Philosophy of Science Association. Part II: Symposia Papers , December 2004 , pp. 1215 - 1226
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

Support for the research for this paper came from the American Philosophical Society, the Dibner Institute for the History of Science, the Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin, and the Max-Planck-Insitut für Wissenschaftsgeschichte. Thanks are due to Trevon Fuller, Justin Garson, and Anya Plutynski for comments on an earlier draft.

References

Bateson, William (1922), “Evolutionary Faith and Modern Doubts”, Evolutionary Faith and Modern Doubts 109:553–556.Google Scholar
Belloc, Hilaire (1920a), “A Few Words with Mr. Wells”, A Few Words with Mr. Wells 166:182–202.Google Scholar
Belloc, Hilaire (1920b), “Mr. Wells’ ‘Outline of History’”, Mr. Wells’ ‘Outline of History’ 3:43–62.Google Scholar
Bowler, Peter J. (1989), The Mendelian Revolution: The Emergence of Hereditarian Concepts in Science and Society. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Carson, Hampton L. (1980), “Cytogenetics and the Neo-Darwinian Synthesis”, in Mayr, Ernst and Provine, William B. (eds.), The Evolutionary Synthesis: Perspectives on the Unification of Biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 86–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ewens, Warren John (1979), Mathematical Population Genetics. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Ewens, Warren John (1990), “Population Genetics Theory—The Past and the Future”, in Lessard, Sabin (ed.), Mathematical and Statistical Developments of Evolutionary Theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 177–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, Ronald Aylmer (1918), “The Correlation between Relatives on the Supposition of Mendelian Inheritance”, The Correlation between Relatives on the Supposition of Mendelian Inheritance 52:399–433.Google Scholar
Fisher, Ronald Aylmer (1922), “On the Dominance Ratio”, On the Dominance Ratio 42:321–341.Google Scholar
Fisher, Ronald Aylmer (1930), The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, Ronald Aylmer ([1932] 1983), “A Review of The Causes of Evolution”, in Bennett, J. H. (ed.), Natural Selection, Heredity, and Eugenics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 289–291.Google Scholar
Galton, Francis (1889), Natural Inheritance. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Gould, Stephen Jay (2002), The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagedoorn, Arend L., and Hagedoorn-Vorstheuvel la Brand, A. C. (1921), The Relative Value of the Processes Causing Evolution. Hague: Martinus-Nijhoff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haldane, Haldane John Burdon (1924), “A Mathematical Theory of Natural and Artificial Selection. Part I.”, A Mathematical Theory of Natural and Artificial Selection. Part I. 23:19–41.Google Scholar
Haldane, Haldane John Burdon (1927), “Darwinism To-day”, in Haldane, J. B. S., Possible Worlds and Other Essays. London: Chatto and Windus, 29–47.Google Scholar
Haldane, Haldane John Burdon (1932), The Causes of Evolution. London: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
Haldane, Haldane John Burdon (1937), “A Dialectical Account of Evolution”, A Dialectical Account of Evolution 1:473–486.Google Scholar
Haldane, Haldane John Burdon (1938), “Forty Years of Genetics”, in Needham, Joseph and Pagel, Walter (eds.), Background to Modern Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 223–243.Google Scholar
Haldane, Haldane John Burdon (1939), The Marxist Philosophy and the Sciences. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Huxley, Julian (1922), “Kentucky Bans Evolution”, Kentucky Bans Evolution 31:68–69.Google Scholar
Huxley, Julian (1942), Evolution: The Modern Synthesis. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Jennings, H. S. (1916), “The Numerical Results of Diverse Systems of Breeding”, The Numerical Results of Diverse Systems of Breeding 1:53–89.Google Scholar
Keith, A. (1922a), “Is Darwinism at the Dusk or the Dawn”, Is Darwinism at the Dusk or the Dawn 92:173–182.Google Scholar
Keith, A. (1922b), “Why I Am a Darwinist”, Rationalist Annual, 11–14.Google Scholar
Livingstone, B. E. (1922), “The American Association at Toronto”, The American Association at Toronto 109: 285.Google Scholar
Mayr, Ernst (1980), “Prologue: Some Thoughts on the History of the Evolutionary Synthesis”, in Mayr, Ernst and Provine, William B. (eds.), The Evolutionary Synthesis: Perspectives on the Unification of Biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McOuat, Gordon, and Winsor, Mary P. (1995), “J. B. S. Haldane’s Darwinism in Its Religious Context”, J. B. S. Haldane’s Darwinism in Its Religious Context 28:227–231.Google Scholar
Pearson, Karl (1893), “Contributions to the Mathematical Theory of Evolution”, Contributions to the Mathematical Theory of Evolution 56:675–679.Google Scholar
Pearson, Karl (1900), The Grammar of Science, 2nd. ed. London: Adam and Charles Black.Google Scholar
Pearson, Karl (1904a), “A Mendelian’s View of the Law of Ancestral Inheritance”, A Mendelian’s View of the Law of Ancestral Inheritance 3:109–112.Google Scholar
Pearson, Karl (1904b), “The Mendelian Quarter”, The Mendelian Quarter 70:529–530.Google Scholar
Provine, William B. (1971), The Origins of Theoretical Population Genetics, 1st ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Provine, William B. (1986), Sewall Wright and Evolutionary Biology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Provine, William B. (2001) The Origins of Theoretical Population Genetics, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Punnett, Reginald Crundall (1915), Mimicry in Butterflies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robinson, J. H. (1922), “Is Darwinism Dead?”, Is Darwinism Dead? 145:68–74.Google Scholar
Sarkar, Sahotra (1998), Genetics and Reductionism. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinberg, W. (1908), “Über den Nachweis der Vererbung beim Menschen”, Über den Nachweis der Vererbung beim Menschen 64:369–382.Google Scholar
Wentworth, E. N., and Remick, B. L. (1916), “Some Breeding Properties of the Generalized Mendelian Population”, Some Breeding Properties of the Generalized Mendelian Population 1:608–616.Google ScholarPubMed
Wright, Sewall (1921a), “Systems of Mating. I. The Biometric Relations between Parent and Offspring”, Systems of Mating. I. The Biometric Relations between Parent and Offspring 6:111–123.Google Scholar
Wright, Sewall (1921b), “Systems of Mating. II. The Effects of Inbreeding on the Genetic Composition of a Population”, Systems of Mating. II. The Effects of Inbreeding on the Genetic Composition of a Population 6:124–143.Google Scholar
Wright, Sewall (1921c), “Systems of Mating. III. Assortative Mating Based on Somatic Resemblance”, Systems of Mating. III. Assortative Mating Based on Somatic Resemblance 6:144–161.Google Scholar
Wright, Sewall (1921d), “Systems of Mating. IV. The Effects of Selection”, Systems of Mating. IV. The Effects of Selection 6:162–166.Google Scholar
Wright, Sewall (1931), “Evolution in Mendelian Populations”, Evolution in Mendelian Populations 16:97–159.Google ScholarPubMed
Yule, George Udny (1902), “Mendel’s Laws and Their Probable Relations to Intra-racial Heredity”, Mendel’s Laws and Their Probable Relations to Intra-racial Heredity 1:193–207, 222–238.Google Scholar
Yule, George Udny (1906), “On the Theory of Inheritance of Quantitative Compound Characters on the Basis of Mendel’s Laws—A Preliminary Note”, in Wilks, W. (ed.), Report of the Third International Conference 1906 on Genetics. London: Royal Horticultural Society, 140–142.Google Scholar