Understanding the Conceptual Gap in Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter caelestis
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conceptual gap in Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, particularly focusing on the mechanisms of organismic change over time. Participants seek clarification on what this gap entails and how it relates to both historical and modern understandings of evolutionary theory.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about the specific "conceptual gap" referenced in the assignment, noting that Darwin's original ideas do not fully align with current evolutionary understanding, particularly regarding genetic inheritance.
  • One participant mentions Darwin's concept of "Pangenesis" and contrasts it with "Mendelian inheritance," suggesting that while the existence of evolution is accepted, the mechanisms proposed by Darwin are debated.
  • Another participant proposes that the conceptual gap lies in Darwin's lack of a coherent understanding of the origins of "variants," which natural selection acts upon, indicating that Darwin was unaware of Mendelian genetics and mutations.
  • A different viewpoint highlights the issue of "Blending inheritance," where traits could be diluted over generations, complicating the understanding of inheritance in Darwin's time.
  • Some participants question the motivations of those seeking help, suggesting a potential connection to creationist views, while others assert their genuine need for assistance with the biology assignment.
  • There is mention of historical critiques of Darwin's theory, including an example from Fleeming Jenkin regarding the dilution of traits over generations.
  • A participant notes that Darwin accepted the possibility of Lamarckian inheritance, which contrasts with modern evolutionary theory.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the specific nature of the conceptual gap, with multiple competing views and interpretations presented throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Some participants acknowledge limitations in their understanding of Darwin's original writings and the historical context of evolutionary theory, indicating that their interpretations may not fully capture the nuances of the topic.

caelestis
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Hello,

I'm having a lot of trouble with this statement and was wondering if someone could help clarify or give me a brief explanation of Darwin's conceptual gap??

It reads "Charles Darwin presented ideas on the causes of organismic change through time.
A primary conceptual gap existed which left his theory open to criticism."


I have tried endless hours searching the web for more information and reading through my textbook but still had no luck...

Thankyou I would really appreciate your help. :)
 
Biology news on Phys.org
caelestis said:
Hello,

I'm having a lot of trouble with this statement and was wondering if someone could help clarify or give me a brief explanation of Darwin's conceptual gap??

It reads "Charles Darwin presented ideas on the causes of organismic change through time.
A primary conceptual gap existed which left his theory open to criticism."I have tried endless hours searching the web for more information and reading through my textbook but still had no luck...

Thankyou I would really appreciate your help. :)

I don't know what exactly the "conceptual gap" is that your source is referring to, but some parts of the original formation of evolution by Drawin isn't in agreement with our current knowledge of evolution (neo-Darwinism). For instance, Darwin proposed a genetic mechanism of inheritance called "Pangenesis" but it has since between replaced with "Mendelian inheritance" as part of the modern sysnthesis. Note that although there was disagreement about the mechanism, the existence of the process known as evolution isn't in any scientific debate.
 
It would help a lot if you provided your source and the context of the quote.
 
Ah yes! I didn't think of that approach! Thankyou so much! :)
 
caelestis said:
Ah yes! I didn't think of that approach! Thankyou so much! :)

If you have tried to provide a link and can't, send a Private Message to me and I can get your link to work (we recently changed some things here that will hinder you from posting a link until you have a few more posts...blame the spammers for ruining it for everyone). Context would really be helpful here.
 
Moonbear said:
If you have tried to provide a link and can't, send a Private Message to me and I can get your link to work (we recently changed some things here that will hinder you from posting a link until you have a few more posts...blame the spammers for ruining it for everyone). Context would really be helpful here.

Oh I actually understand it now after missing a little important fact...
But thankyou for telling me about posting links Moonbear, I'll remember it for next time :)
 
caelestis said:
Ah yes! I didn't think of that approach! Thankyou so much! :)

What approach?
 
the source is a Biology assignment, and the question is "In 1859, Charles Darwin published Thw Origin Of Species in which he presented ideas on the causes of organismic change through time.
A primary conceptual gap existed which left his theory open to criticism. What was that conceptual gap?"

I too have been trying to find the answer with little success.

Any ideas peoples?
 
Are these really kids asking for help with biology homework?

Or are they creationist trolls fishing for a "conceptual gap"?

hmmm
 
  • #10
Not cynical at all are you?!?

wouldn't call myself a kid, (24 - I know, how ancient!)

but definitely asking for help with bio assignment, is very late and still no clue... have sadly run out of coffee... woe is me :(

personally have no time for creationists - twats don't think animals go to heaven! - if i were god i'd prefer the critters to the humans, but that's just me :)

so any ideas or?!?
 
  • #11
The conceptual gap was that genes are discrete.
The problem at the time was that any small advantage would be diluted out if you think of inheriting traits as analogue quantities. It's only once you know that a trait/gene is fully inherited or not at all that the mechanism makes sense.
 
  • #12
The conceptual gap you refer to is probably the fact that Darwin didn't have a coherent notion of where his "variants" could come from in the first place. Natural selection nicely explains how evolution happens by preexisting variants becoming more prevalent due to environmental pressures. It does not say anything about where the varients came from to start with.

Darwin may have had ideas about this, but whatever he thought it probably isn't the accepted view today. Darwin didn't know about mendelian genetics or mutations etc so he couldn't have had a modern view of where his variants came from.

Though I haven't actually read Darwin's original writings so take this with a grain of salt...


edit: mgb and I cross-posted. His post also makes sense, that may be the answer you are looking for.
 
  • #13
The theory was called "Blending inheritance".

The objections at the time were that an old trait could be breed back into a line - you could breed small dogs for size and strength back into wolves. This had practical importance to breed efficent cattle and sheep and would be impossible if the trait had been diluted to a tiny part by many generations.

The example given by Darwin's critic Fleeming Jenkin (excuse the 19th C world view!)
- imagine a white man shipwrecked on an island, however superior his gifts they would be diluted until many generations on there would be no trace of white skin among the islanders.
 
  • #14
but some parts of the original formation of evolution by Drawin isn't in agreement with our current knowledge of evolution (neo-Darwinism).

*Cough* Neo-Darwinism came up around 1900 and it is NOT the current theory of evolution. The current one actually does not have a concise name and is often referred to as new modern synthesis and sometimes even postmodern synthesis (modern synthesis came up around the 1950s).

One of the primary conceptual gaps in Darwin's original theory is the means of inheritance. Genes were unknown at that time and he could not really formulate how traits are passed on. In fact, he also accepted the possibility of Lamarckian inheritance, a notion that was refuted by the concept of neo-Darwinism.
 

Similar threads

Evolution vs Bible: Charles Darwin's Theory
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Reviewing Thesis Topic on Evolutionary Theory
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
3-10 points why you believe in the theory of evolution and big bang
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
How Does Philip Johnson Challenge Darwinism in Evolution as Dogma?
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
13K
Graduate Why Popsci is Essential for a Well-Rounded Physics Education
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Darwinism: The Controversial Theory of Natural Selection Explained
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
8K
Brief Conceptual Physics Books: 100-200 Pages, Clarity, Breadth & Depth
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Is Intelligent Design Validating Scientific Panic in Evolutionary Theory?
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
11K
Is Evolutionary Theory Undermined by Creationist Claims?
  • · Replies 266 ·
9
Replies
266
Views
32K
Is biosemiotics a valid alternative to traditional evolutionary theory?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K