and the historical development of living systems.Anthropogenesis
Theories of C. Darwin, E. Bauer, L. Berg, modern understanding mechanisms of evolution organic world.
Stages of anthropogenesis. Idea of the noosphere: scientists V.I. Vernadsky, P. Teilhard de Chardin.
The origin of life on Earth.C. Darwin's theory.
Modern understanding
mechanisms of evolutionorganic world
Evolution is a historical change in the form of organization and behavior of living beings over a series of generations. Evolutionary theory provides an explanation for the set of characteristics that characterize all life on Earth.
In various fields of natural science (geology, paleontology, biogeography, embryology, comparative anatomy, the study of the cellular structure of organisms), the materials collected by scientists contradicted the ideas of divine origin and the immutability of nature. The great English scientist Charles Darwin was able to correctly explain all these facts, generalize them, and create a theory of evolution.
Basic principles of evolutionary theory of Part Darwin
Within each species of living organisms, there is a huge range of individual heredity variability (in morphological, physiological, behavioral and any other characteristics). It is impossible to find two individuals that are completely identical in their totality of characteristics.
All living organisms have the ability to increase in number.
Life resources for any type of living organisms are limited, and therefore, with a large production of individuals, a struggle for existence must arise either between individuals of the same species or individuals of different species, or with natural conditions.
Only adapted individuals survive, having those deviations that turned out to be adaptive to given environmental conditions. Natural selection of individual isolated varieties in different conditions of existence gradually leads to divergence (divergence) of the characteristics of these varieties.
Data from geology, paleontology, embryology and other sciences also pointed to the variability of the organic world. However, most scientists did not recognize evolution: no one observed the transformation of one species into another. Work was intensively carried out on the selection of new breeds of animals and varieties of cultivated plants.
Proponents of the constancy of species argued that each variety, each breed has a special wild ancestor. Darwin proved that this was not so. All chicken breeds come from the wild banker chicken, domestic ducks from the wild mallard duck, and rabbit breeds from the wild European rabbit. The ancestors of cattle were two types of wild aurochs, and dogs were the wolf and, for some breeds, possibly the jackal. At the same time, animal breeds and plant varieties can differ very sharply.
The process of creating new breeds of animals and varieties of cultivated plants through the systematic preservation and reproduction of individuals with certain traits and properties valuable to humans over a series of generations is called artificial selection.
Darwin identified two forms of artificial selection: conscious or methodical (the breeder sets himself a specific task and selects for one or two characteristics) and unconscious (a primitive form of artificial selection). Each pair of organisms produces many more offspring than survive to adulthood. Most of the organisms born die before reaching sexual maturity. The causes of death are varied (attack by enemies, lack of food, etc.). In nature there is a continuous struggle for existence. This term should be understood in a broad sense, as any dependence of organisms on the entire complex of conditions surrounding it, living and inanimate nature. In other words, the struggle for existence is a set of diverse and complex relationships that exist between organisms and environmental conditions.
Charles Darwin identified three main forms of struggle for existence: interspecific, intraspecific, and struggle against unfavorable conditions.
Years have passed since Darwin's theory of evolution was created, the historical era has changed, but the discussion on the problems of evolution does not subside.
Nowadays, ideas that would have been considered absurd just a few years ago are being actively promoted and widely discussed. This is the undoubted merit of “scientific” creationists. The question arises whether all this is connected with the objective falsity or non-scientific nature of the theory of evolution? Isn't it a fruitless dead end in the development of science? Obviously this is not the case. This is confirmed partly by the successes achieved in recent decades by many biologists working in the field of empirical study of evolution, and partly by the study of those critical remarks that are most often expressed by opponents of evolutionism.
Let us consider the most common provisions of modern evolution, criticized by its opponents. It is often argued that we can observe microevolutionary changes, but we never see speciation and macroevolution. Indeed, usually these processes occur so slowly that they cannot be the object of direct observation. However, speciation can be recorded empirically from direct or indirect data. Quite a lot of such data is given in general summaries on speciation. There are also more specific works on individual groups of animals or plants. Sometimes speciation can be repeated experimentally. For example, the research of V. A. Rybin showed that the ancestor of the common plum, in all likelihood, was a natural hybrid of cherry plum and sloe. As a result of experimental crossing of these plants with subsequent doubling of chromosomes, hybrids were obtained - quite viable, very similar to real plums, and cross well both with them and with each other. Some differences between synthesized plums and real ones were also discovered. It can be assumed that since their origin, these latter have managed to change somewhat in the course of further evolution.
Man-made species appear to be the majority of our domestic animals and crops. Sometimes paleontological data allows us to trace how, through gradual transformations, one species turned into another. For example, the polar bear appears to have evolved in the late Pleistocene from the brown bear. The entire process is documented by paleontological data; the transition stages of the process are known.
Other examples of speciation could be given. In fact, they are also known to creationists. However, modern creationists argue that speciation always occurs through the loss or redistribution of certain already existing hereditary factors and only within the framework of a certain primary type of structure, the so-called “baramin”. The emergence of new hereditary information, and, consequently, new phenotypic structures, according to creationists, is impossible. The emergence of new “baramins” is also impossible. These latter were created directly by the creator.
The following should be noted about these concepts. In evolution, old structures are indeed used more often than new ones arise. Reduction processes are very common. Therefore, it will not be a problem to find examples that do not contradict the views of creationists. For example, plum came from sloe and cherry plum through hybridization followed by polyploidy, that is, without the emergence of new genetic information. Some changes to this information may have occurred during further changes. However, fundamentally new structures also appear quite often in evolution.
In the evolution of the polar bear, new features arose (a complex of comprehensive morphological, physiological and behavioral adaptations associated with the transition to life in the extreme conditions of the Far North and to a semi-aquatic lifestyle), which were definitely absent in the brown bear. Genetically, these two species remain very similar (in a zoo they can form fertile hybrids), but their morphological and ecological differences are so great that some scientists have even recommended that the polar bear be separated into a separate genus. Moreover, the polar bear stands at the same high level of organization as the brown bear. He has an equally, if not more, complex lifestyle and behavior. The results of the reduction (in the creationist sense) included among its signs only the transition from omnivory to eating purely animal food, the associated simplification of the dental system and also depigmentation of the coat.
Let us move from reductive evolution to progressive evolution. Creationists and some evolutionists argue that the modern theory of evolution cannot explain the early stages of organ formation, as well as the emergence of structures of a high level of perfection, such as humans. In fact, the problems arising here are associated only with insufficient knowledge of the structure and functioning of these organs, as well as facts and the evolutionary process. For well-studied organs, we usually present general outline how they could have formed in the process of evolution.
Creationists believe that the hereditary information of living organisms was created by God during creation, and can only be lost later. Creationists quite clearly draw an analogy between the creative activity of God and human creativity, seeing in the human mind an imperfect, but still similarity to the mind of God. However, the available data rather suggest that the creative activity of the human mind is based on completely natural processes.
In their opinion, the fact that the existing laws of the universe can be revealed with the help of the human mind, in itself indicates the presence of an intelligent legislator. Indeed, we can agree that there is some correspondence between the logic of our thinking and the logic of processes occurring in nature. This correspondence is not absolute, therefore the process of cognition is always accompanied by errors, and the information obtained as a result of cognition is never exhaustive. Nevertheless, it is the existence of this correspondence that makes knowledge of the surrounding world possible in principle. There is, however, no logical necessity to explain this correspondence by the fact that the mind of beings who experience the world is similar to the mind of the creator who created this world.
It can be explained much more simply and convincingly by the fact that in human evolution, the adaptive advantage was given to the carriers of such mental structures that better corresponded to the reality of our world. Thus, our ability to understand the world gradually improved. It was based on the same process of natural selection.
The ongoing era of great geographical discoveries opened up new, vast spaces for Europeans. In 1606, Dutch sailors saw Australia for the first time. In 1741, V. Bering reached the shores of Alaska. Around the world expeditions of the second half XVIII V. had the consequence of expanding not only geographical horizons, but also biological knowledge about the flora and fauna of new lands. The time has come to systematize the acquired knowledge.
Perceiving nature as a single whole, scientists sought to identify the diversity of organisms and establish the relationship between them. By the end XVII V. it became obvious that the description of organisms is impossible without creating a hierarchical system and establishing family relationships between groups, which led to the formation of ideas about historical development organic world.
Elements of this idea can be traced in the works of ancient Greek philosophers - from Thales to Aristotle. Many philosophers and natural scientists of the Renaissance and Modern times expressed the idea of the interconnection of the forms of living nature. Thus, the German philosopher G. Leibniz (1646-1716) imagined the world as a single harmonious series of increasingly complex forms of plants and animals, originally created by God. The Swiss naturalist C. Bonnet (1720-1793) developed the idea of a “ladder of creatures” (1745) as a reflection of the progressive complexity of the organic world. J. Buffon (1707-1788) put forward a bold hypothesis about the development of the Earth (1748). Dividing the “natural history” of the Earth into seven periods, he suggested that plants, then animals, and then humans appeared in the last periods of the planet’s development. Buffon also admitted that some forms can transform into others under the influence of climate or conditions of existence and that there is “a continuous hierarchy from the lowest plant to the most highly organized animal.”
The principles of taxonomy of the organic world, which were developed by a Swedish doctor and naturalist Carl Linnaeus (Carolus Linnaeus, 1707 - 1778) - first secretary of the Swedish Academy of Sciences, founded in 1739. In his famous work “Systema naturae”, 1735, published 12 times during the author’s lifetime, the basis for the classification of the “three kingdoms of nature" (plants, animals and minerals). He divided each of the kingdoms into classes, orders, genera, species and subspecies; for all organic species introduced mandatory binary (double) nomenclature, in
The species was designated by two names - generic and specific. Linnaeus first attributed man (genus Homo) to the class of mammals (order of primates), which at that time required sufficient courage from the scientist. Let us note that Linnaeus did not doubt the immutability of nature and its expediency.
K. Linnaeus was elected a member of the academies of sciences in Germany (1754), Sweden (1739), Great Britain (1753), Russia (1754), France (1762). This testifies to his enormous influence on the development of world natural science. The works of Linnaeus contributed to the formation of the ideas of J. Cuvier, J. Lamarck and Charles Darwin.
French zoologist Georges Cuvier (George Cuvier, 1769-1832) developed the concept of types in zoology and for the first time combined the classes of mammals, birds, amphibians and fish into one type of vertebrates. He laid the foundations of paleontology and comparative anatomy, and thereby laid the foundation for future evolutionary theory. While engaged in pedagogical work, he created the Faculty of Natural Sciences at the University of Paris.
Jean Lamarck(Jean Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet Lamarck, 1744-1829) - French naturalist, student and follower of French materialists and educators of the 18th century. - formulated the first theory of evolutionary development of living beings. The main provisions of Lamarck's natural philosophical concept are set out in his works “Natural History of Plants” (1803) and “Philosophy of Zoology” (“Philosophic zoologique”, 1809). Working in the comparative anatomy of invertebrates, he was the first to divide animals into vertebrates and invertebrates and introduced these concepts.
Lamarck argued that there are no sharp boundaries between animal species; species are not constant - they change under the influence of the environment, acquiring new properties, and inherit these acquired characteristics. Thus, Lamarck believed that signs that arise adequately to influencing factors environment, are inherited. He considered the main factor of adaptation to be exercise or non-exercise of organs, as well as the formation of new organs. He opposed the concept of preformationism (see p. 347), arguing that “all living bodies come from one another” and do not develop from “pre-existing embryos.”
But Lamarck's theory also contained several idealistic provisions. Thus, he believed that progress in the development of organisms is explained by their internal “desire” for self-improvement. His teaching subsequently took the form Lamarckism- philosophical concept of the second half of the 19th century century, which after the death of Lamarck became the antithesis of Darwinism. This, however, does not detract from the historical merits of Lamarck himself, who proposed the first holistic theory of evolution. This was understood and highly appreciated by one of the world's greatest biologists, the founder of evolutionary teaching, Charles Darwin.
Charles Darwin(Charles Robert Darwin, 1809-1882) left a huge scientific legacy, which numbers more than 8,000 pages. His seminal work, “The Origin of Species by means of natural selection,” was published in 1859. Darwin’s subsequent works, “Changes in Domestic Animals and Cultivated Plants,” "(1868), "The Origin of Man and Sexual Selection" (1871) and others, the doctrine of evolution received its further development.
After graduating from the University of Cambridge, Charles Darwin took part in a trip around the world on the Beagle ship (1831 - 1836), during which he became acquainted with the amazing diversity of the “natural laboratory of evolution”. For 20 years he collected and analyzed materials, experimented and systematized. Based on a wealth of factual material, he came to the conclusion that the animals and plants existing on Earth descended from previously widespread species as a result of evolution. Darwin considered the main factors of evolution variability, heredity And natural selection in conditions of the “struggle for existence” (a concept introduced by Darwin).
Darwin came to the idea of natural selection through his acquaintance with the works on political economy of his compatriot Adam Smith (1776), who wrote about the division of labor in society, the struggle for existence and artificial selection as a result of this struggle. Thus, Darwin gave a natural scientific basis for the emergence of adaptive traits, as opposed to ideas about the original expediency of the existing world.
F. Engels named Darwin's theory among the three main natural scientific discoveries of the 19th century. In 1859, in a letter to K. Marx, he wrote: “... until now there has never been such a grandiose attempt to prove historical development in nature, and moreover, with such success” 1.
Charles Darwin was elected honorary doctor of the Cambridge, Bonn, Breslau and Leiden universities, and a corresponding member of the St. Petersburg (1867) and Berlin (1878) academies of sciences.
The theory of natural selection has met numerous supporters and opponents. Since the mid-1860s, the evolutionary approach began to be used in morphology, embryology, and paleontology; the first experimental studies of evolution appeared. The result of this multifaceted work of scientists from around the world was the creation of a modern synthetic theory of evolution(STE). The fundamental core of this theory is the idea of natural selection as the driving force of evolution and population. The foundations of STE were laid by the works of F. G. Dobzhansky “Genetics and the Origin of Species” (1937), J. Huxley “Evolution. Modern synthesis" (1942), E. Mayer "Systematics and the origin of species" (1942), as well as N.V. Timofeev-Resovsky (on the use of radiation in the study of genes, 1935) and many other foreign and domestic scientists.
Darwin's teaching opened up a new historical approach to the study of the laws of living nature and contributed to the further development of all biological sciences.
Evolution should be understood as a process of long-term, gradual, slow changes leading to radical, qualitatively new changes (the formation of other structures, forms, organisms and their species).
The appearance of a primitive cell meant the end of the prebiological evolution of living things and the beginning of the biological evolution of life.
The first single-celled organisms to appear on the planet were primitive bacteria that did not have a nucleus, i.e. prokaryotes. These were single-celled, nuclear-free organisms. They were anaerobes because they lived in an oxygen-free environment, and heterotrophs because they ate ready-made food. organic compounds"organic broth", i.e. substances synthesized during chemical evolution. Energy metabolism in most prokaryotes occurred according to the fermentation type. But gradually the “organic broth” decreased as a result of active consumption. As it was exhausted, some organisms began to develop ways to form macromolecules biochemically, inside the cells themselves with the help of enzymes. Under such conditions, cells that were able to receive most required energy directly from solar radiation. The process of formation of chlorophyll and photosynthesis followed this path.
The transition of living things to photosynthesis and the autotrophic type of nutrition was a turning point in the evolution of living things. The Earth's atmosphere began to be “filled” with oxygen, which was poison for anaerobes. Therefore, many unicellular anaerobes died, others took refuge in oxygen-free environments - swamps and fed. It was not oxygen that was released, but methane. Still others have adapted to oxygen. Their central metabolic mechanism was oxygen respiration, which made it possible to increase the yield of useful energy by 10-15 times compared to the anaerobic type of metabolism-fermentation. The transition to photosynthesis was long and ended about 1.8 billion years ago. With the emergence of photosynthesis in organic matter The Earth accumulated more and more energy from sunlight, which accelerated the biological cycle of substances and the evolution of living things in general.
In an oxygen environment, eukaryotes, that is, single-celled organisms with a nucleus, formed. These were already more advanced organisms with photosynthetic ability. Their DNA was already concentrated into chromosomes, whereas in prokaryotic cells the hereditary substance was distributed throughout the cell. The chromosomes of eukaryotes were concentrated in the cell nucleus, and the cell itself was already reproducing without significant changes. Thus, the daughter cell of eukaryotes was almost an exact copy of the mother cell and had the same chance of survival as the mother cell.
The subsequent evolution of eukaryotes was associated with the division into plant and animal cells. This division occurred in the Proterozoic, when the Earth was inhabited by single-celled organisms.
From the beginning of evolution, eukaryotes developed dually, that is, they simultaneously had groups with autotrophic and heterotrophic nutrition, which ensured the integrity and significant autonomy of the living world.
Plant cells evolved towards a decrease in the ability to move due to the development of a hard cellulose shell, but towards the use of photosynthesis.
Animal cells have evolved to increase their ability to move and improve their ability to absorb and excrete food products.
The next stage in the development of living things was sexual reproduction. It arose approximately 900 million years ago.
A further step in the evolution of living things occurred about 700-800 million years ago, when multicellular organisms with a differentiated body, tissues and organs that perform specific functions. These were sponges, coelenterates, arthropods, etc., related to multicellular animals.
Subsequently, many types of animals already existed in the Cambrian seas. Later they specialized and improved. Among the marine animals of that time were crustaceans, sponges, corals, mollusks, trilobites, etc.
At the end of the Ordovician period, large carnivores, as well as vertebrates, began to appear.
Further evolution of vertebrates went in the direction of jawed fish-like animals. In the Devonian, lungfish - amphibians, and then insects - began to appear. Gradually developed nervous system as a consequence of improving the forms of reflection.
Especially important stage in the evolution of living forms was the emergence of plant and animal organisms from water to land and a further increase in the number of species land plants and animals. In the future, it is from them that highly organized forms of life arise. The emergence of plants on land began at the end of the Silurian, and the active conquest of land by vertebrates began in the Carboniferous.
Transition to life in air environment demanded many changes from living organisms and assumed the development of appropriate adaptations. He sharply increased the rate of evolution of life on Earth. Man became the pinnacle of the evolution of living things.
Evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin.
The idea of long-term and gradual changes in all species of animals and plants was expressed by scientists long before Charles Darwin. They spoke in this spirit in different time Aristotle, Swedish naturalist C. Linnaeus, French biologist J. Lamarck, contemporary of Charles Darwin, English naturalist A. Wallace and other scientists.
The undoubted merit of Charles Darwin is not the idea of evolution itself, but the fact that it was he who first discovered the principle of natural selection in nature and generalized individual evolutionary ideas into one coherent theory of evolution. In the development of his theory, Charles Darwin relied on a large amount of factual material, on experiments and the practice of breeding work to develop new varieties of plants and various breeds of animals.
At the same time, Charles Darwin came to the conclusion that from the many diverse phenomena of living nature, three fundamental factors in the evolution of living things clearly stand out, united by a brief formula: variability, heredity, natural selection.
These fundamental principles are based on the following conclusions and observations of the living world:
- Variability. It is characteristic of any group of animals and plants; organisms differ from each other in many different ways. In nature it is impossible to find two identical organisms. Variability is an integral property of living organisms; it manifests itself constantly and everywhere.
According to Charles Darwin, there are two types of variability in nature - definite and indefinite.
1) Certain variability (adaptive modification) is the ability of all individuals of the same species under certain environmental conditions to respond in the same way to these conditions (food, climate, etc.). By modern ideas, adaptive modifications are not inherited, and therefore, for the most part, cannot supply material for organic evolution.
2) Uncertain variability (mutations) causes significant changes in the body in a variety of directions. This variability, unlike a certain one, is hereditary in nature, with minor deviations in the first generation increasing in subsequent ones. Uncertain variability is also associated with environmental changes, but not directly, as in adaptive modifications, but indirectly. Therefore, according to Charles Darwin, it is uncertain changes that play a decisive role in evolution.
- Constant abundance of the species. The number of organisms of each species that are born is greater than the number that can find food and survive; however, the abundance of each species remains relatively constant under natural conditions.
- Competitive relations of individuals. Since more individuals are born than can survive, there is a constant struggle for existence in nature, competition for food and habitat.
- Adaptability, adaptability of organisms. Changes that make it easier for an organism to survive in a particular environment give its owners advantages over other organisms that are less adapted to external conditions and die as a result. The idea of “survival of the fittest” is central to the theory of natural selection.
- Reproduction of “successful” acquired characteristics in offspring. Surviving individuals give birth to offspring, and thus the “successful” positive changes that allowed them to survive are passed on to subsequent generations.
The essence of the evolutionary process is the continuous adaptation of living organisms to various environmental conditions. natural environment and in the emergence of increasingly complex organisms. That's why biological evolution directed from simple biological forms to more complex forms.
Thus, natural selection, which is the result of the struggle for existence, is the main factor of evolution, directing and determining evolutionary changes. These changes become noticeable after passing through many generations. It is in natural selection that one of the fundamental features of living things is reflected - the dialectic of interaction between the organic system and the environment.
The undoubted advantages of Charles Darwin's evolutionary theory also had some disadvantages. Thus, she could not explain the reasons for the appearance in some organisms of certain structures that seem useless; many species lacked transitional forms between modern animals and fossils; ideas about heredity were also a weak point. Subsequently, shortcomings were discovered regarding the main causes and factors of organic evolution. Already in the 20th century, it became clear that Charles Darwin’s theory needed further refinement and improvement, taking into account the latest achievements biological science. This became a prerequisite for the creation of the synthetic theory of evolution (STE).
Synthetic theory of evolution.
The achievements of genetics in revealing the genetic code, the successes of molecular biology, embryology, evolutionary morphology, popular genetics, ecology and some other sciences indicate the need to combine modern genetics with the theory of evolution of Charles Darwin. This unification gave rise in the second half of the 20th century to a new biological paradigm - the synthetic theory of evolution. Since it is based on the theory of Charles Darwin, it is called neo-Darwinian. This theory is considered as non-classical biology. The synthetic theory of evolution made it possible to overcome the contradictions between evolutionary theory and genetics. STE does not yet have a physical model of evolution, but is a multifaceted, complex teaching that underlies modern evolutionary biology. This synthesis of genetics and evolutionary teaching was a qualitative leap in both the development of genetics itself and modern evolutionary theory. This leap marked the creation of a new center for the system of biological cognition and the transition of biology to the modern non-classical level of its development. STE is often called the general theory of evolution, which is a combination of the evolutionary ideas of Charles Darwin, mainly natural selection with modern results of research in the field of heredity and variability.
The basic ideas of STE were laid down by the Russian geneticist S. Chetverikov back in 1926 in his works on popular genetics. These ideas were supported and developed by American geneticists D. Haldane and modern Russian geneticist N. Dubinin.
The supporting point of STE is the idea that the elementary component of evolution is not a species or an individual, but a population. It is precisely this that is a holistic system of interconnection between organisms, possessing all the data for self-development. It is not just any individual traits or individuals that are subject to selection, but the entire population, its genotype. However, this selection is carried out through changes in the phenotypic characteristics of individual individuals, which leads to the emergence of new characteristics with the change of biological generations.
The elementary unit of heredity is the gene. It is a section of the DNA molecule that determines the development of certain characteristics of the organism. Soviet geneticist N.V. Timofeev-Resovsky formulated a position on the phenomena and factors of evolution. It is as follows:
Population is an elementary structural unit;
The mutation process is the supplier of elementary evolutionary material;
Population waves are fluctuations in the population size in one direction or another from the average number of its individuals;
Isolation consolidates differences in the set of genotypes and causes the division of the original population into several independent ones;
Natural selection is selective survival with the possibility of leaving offspring by individuals who have reached reproductive age.
The concept of evolution Evolution is a process of long-term and gradual changes that lead to fundamental qualitative changes in living organisms, accompanied by the emergence of new biological systems, forms and species. Created based on historical method evolutionary theory, the task of which is to study the factors, driving forces and patterns of organic evolution, occupies a central place in the system of sciences about living nature.
History of the development of evolutionary ideas Two points of view explaining the diversity of species in living nature: The first of them arose on the basis of ancient dialectics, which affirmed the idea of development and change in the surrounding world; The second point of view appeared along with the Christian worldview, based on the ideas of creationism.
The most important achievements of antiquity and modern times Aristotle “On the parts of animals” - the idea of a “ladder of living beings”; Carl Linnaeus and his classification of species; Formation of the doctrine of “transformism” - the idea of variability of species of organisms under the influence of environmental changes in the absence of a holistic and consistent concept of evolution.
Concept of development by J.B. Lamarck Three questions: 1) What is the basic unit of evolution? 2) What are the factors and driving forces (1744 - 1829) of evolution? 3) How is the transfer of newly acquired characteristics to subsequent generations?
The unit of evolution according to Lamarck The unit of evolution is the organism. Lamarck's evolutionary theory was based on the idea of development, gradual and slow, from simple to complex, taking into account the role of the external environment in the transformation of organisms. Lamarck believed that the first spontaneously generated organisms gave rise to the entire variety of organic forms that exist today. The development from the simplest to the most advanced organisms is the main content of the history of the organic world.
Factors and driving forces evolution Inherent in living nature is the original (laid down by the Creator) desire to complicate and self-improvement of its organization; influence of the external environment and living conditions: nutrition, climate, soil characteristics, moisture, temperature, etc.
Mechanism of transmission of acquired characteristics to subsequent generations Mechanism of heredity: individual changes, if they are repeated in a number of generations, during reproduction are inherited by descendants and become characteristics of the species; Moreover, if some organs of animals develop, then others, not involved in the process of change, atrophy.
The theory of catastrophes by J. Cuvier Identification of the principle of correlations - each part of the body reflects the principles of the structure of the entire organism. Development of the theory of catastrophes - Cuvier came to the conclusion that gigantic cataclysms periodically occurred on Earth, destroying entire continents, and with them their inhabitants. Later, new organisms appeared in their place.
The theory of evolution of Charles Darwin Darwin formulated the main provisions of his theory of evolution and outlined them in the book “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection” (1859). (1809 – 1882)
The main driving factors of evolution in Darwin's theory Factors: Variability; Heredity; Struggle for existence; Natural selection.
Variability Certain (group) variability is a similar change in all individuals of the offspring in the same direction due to the influence of certain conditions. = modification Indefinite (individual) variability - the appearance of various minor differences in individuals of the same species, by which one individual differs from others. = mutation
Heredity is the property of organisms to ensure the continuity of characteristics and properties between generations, as well as to determine the nature of the development of the organism in specific environmental conditions. In the process of reproduction, it is not traits that are transmitted from generation to generation, but a code of hereditary information (the norm of reaction of a developing individual to the action of the external environment), which determines only the possibility of developing future traits within a certain range.
The struggle for existence is the totality of relationships of organisms of a given species with each other, with other types of living organisms and non-living environmental factors. Darwin identified three main forms of struggle for existence: 1) interspecific, 2) intraspecific, 3) struggle with unfavorable environmental conditions.
Natural selection is a set of changes occurring in nature that ensure the survival of the most adapted individuals and the predominance of their offspring, as well as the selective destruction of organisms that are unadapted to existing or changed environmental conditions.
Disadvantages of Darwin's theory According to the theory of evolution, mutations should occur very often, and for the most part they should be useful (in reality, almost all mutations are harmful) or, in extreme cases, useless; Also, according to the theory of evolution, in one place and at one time there should be two individuals of the same species and with the same mutations, and they should be of different sexes. They must survive, interbreed, and their descendants must have the same mutant characteristics (the descendants must also survive, find the same mutant of the opposite sex, etc.). So far this has never been seen in the natural environment.
Disadvantages of Darwin's theory Questions also fell out of the field of view of Darwinists: About the reasons for the preservation of the systemic unity of organisms in the historical development; On the mechanisms of inclusion of ontogenetic rearrangements in the evolutionary process; On the uneven pace of evolution; About the causes and mechanisms of biotic crises, etc. In addition, there is no evidence that man descended from apes, since not a single piece of evidence (fossils) has been found confirming the presence of an intermediate stage between man and ape.
Neo-Lamarckism mechanolamarckism - this concept explained the evolutionary transformations of organisms by their original ability to expediently respond to changes in the external environment, while changing their structures and functions; psycho-Lamarckism - evolution was presented as a gradual strengthening of the role of consciousness in the movement from primitive creatures to intelligent forms of life; ortholamarckism - the direction of evolution is determined by the internal original properties of organisms.
The concept of teleogenesis This concept is ideologically close to ortholamarckism, as it comes from Lamarck’s idea of the internal desire of all living organisms to progress. Within the concept of teleogenesis, the doctrine of saltationism stands out, according to which all major evolutionary events - from the emergence of new species to changes in biotas in the geological history of the Earth - occur as a result of abrupt changes, saltations, or macromutations.
Genetic anti-Darwinism At the beginning of the 20th century. genetics arose - the study of heredity and variability; The spread of anti-evolutionism (W. Betson), according to which mutational variability was identified with evolutionary transformations, which excluded the need for selection as the main cause of evolution.
Theory of nomogenesis The basis of the theory of nomogenesis by L. S. Berg, created in 1922, was the idea that evolution is a programmed process of realizing internal patterns inherent in all living things (1876 - 1950). Berg believed that organisms have an internal force of an unknown nature that acts purposefully, regardless of the external environment, in the direction of increasing the complexity of the organization.
Synthetic theory of evolution = general theory evolution = neo-Darwinism is a theory of organic evolution through natural selection of genetically determined traits. The elementary evolutionary structure is the population; An elementary evolutionary phenomenon is a change in the genotypic composition of a population; Elementary hereditary material is the gene pool of the population; The elementary evolutionary factors are mutation processes, population waves numbers, isolation and natural selection.
Concepts of micro- and macroevolution Microevolution is understood as a set of evolutionary processes occurring in populations, leading to changes in the gene pool of these populations and the formation of new species. Macroevolution is understood as evolutionary transformations leading to the formation of taxa of a higher rank than the species (genera, orders, classes).
Basic provisions of STE 1. The main factor of evolution is natural selection, which integrates and regulates the action of all other factors (mutagenesis, hybridization, migration, isolation, etc.); 2. Evolution proceeds divergently, gradually, through the selection of random mutations, and new forms are formed through hereditary changes; 3. Evolutionary changes are random and undirected; the starting material for them is mutations; initial population organizations and changes in external conditions limit and direct hereditary changes; 4. Macroevolution, leading to the formation of supraspecific groups, is carried out only through the processes of microevolution, and there are no specific mechanisms for the emergence of new forms of life.
Unfortunately, the field of theoretical biology dealing with evolutionary theory is inherently an arena for clashes of class interests. This is understandable: evolutionary teaching questions religious dogmas, and religion has been a proven method for thousands of years of leading the oppressed masses away from the struggle for a just world. It seems that this is also related to the spread of a philistine, simplified view of evolutionary theories among the population. Therefore, I had to put aside the conversation about the achievements of molecular biology and genetics and start explaining the relationships between the evolutionary teachings existing today.
For a long time, humanity was under the undeniable influence of the creationist paradigm. Creationism (from the Latin creatio, gen. creationis - creation) is a worldview concept according to which the main forms of the organic world (life), humanity, planet Earth, as well as the world as a whole, are considered as directly created by the creator or god.
Creationism has not always existed. Thus, the Australian Arunta tribe believes that the world has existed from eternity. IN time immemorial there lived half-beasts, half-people who, through witchcraft, transformed some objects into others; Australians don’t even ask where these creatures came from. They believe that the Sun came from a woman with a burning brand, who climbed into the sky and there turned into a fire.
“The concept of “creation of the world” developed in the era of the decomposition of the primitive communal system. Pottery production contributed to the idea that the world was sculpted from clay. In Elephantine they spoke of the ancient Egyptian god Khnum, who shaped the world from Nile clay on a pottery wheel, like pottery.”
This is apparently how the biblical myth of Adam, whom God sculpted from clay, arose.
The first evolutionary paradigms were formed in Ancient Greece. Thus, Anaximenes (585 - 525 BC) believed that people descended from fish.
Empedocles (c. 490 - c. 430 BC) believed that heads without necks, arms without shoulders, eyes without foreheads, hair, internal organs rushed through space in a state of Enmity, but in a fit of Love united into freaks, centaurs and hermaphrodites; only the most appropriate forms survived: something similar to Darwin’s natural selection took place...
“So from the mixture of elements, endless hosts of creatures
Occurs in diverse and wondrous-looking images.”
Empedocles, however, does not speak of the unidirectionality of the evolutionary process. Love and Enmity follow each other in cycles; in the beginning there was the Golden Age.
Aristotle arranged living beings from lower to higher in the famous “ladder of nature.”
The Roman Lucretius Carus (c. 99 BC – 55 BC) believed that butterflies were once flowers.
The path to all this emerging diversity of evolutionary thought was closed in the Middle Ages. For many centuries in Europe, the dominance of the creationist paradigm, formed by the priestly circles of the ancient slave states of Babylon and Egypt, was established. This paradigm, along with other measures, reliably ensured the class rule of the feudal lords and began to be questioned only after the bourgeoisie began to establish a new system. There are as many species as God created them.
But already Carl Linnaeus (Swedish: Carl Linnaeus, Carl Linné, Latin: Carolus Linnaeus, after receiving nobility in 1761 - Carl von Linné; May 23, 1707, Roshult - January 10, 1778, Uppsala), author of the “System of Nature” ” and the binary nomenclature accepted to this day in biology (Latin generic and species names, for example Homo sapiens - Homo sapiens), towards the end of his life he believed that new species could arise as a result of crossing. Linnaeus classified humans into the class of mammals, into the order of primates, together with monkeys, prosimians and a number of animals that have no relation to primates, for example, with bats.
The first holistic evolutionary teaching belongs to Jean Baptiste Lamarck (French: Jean-Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet Lamarck; August 1, 1744 – December 18, 1829). It was outlined by him in his work “Philosophy of Zoology”.
Like Aristotle’s “ladder of beings,” Lamarck arranged living beings into steps, levels - gradations. The main evolution according to Lamarck is the “striving for improvement.” The results of exercising or not exercising organs are inherited. Lamarck's most popular example is with giraffes. First, environmental conditions changed: the ancestors of giraffes had to stretch their necks for leaves. Their necks lengthened, like muscles during exercise. This is inherited.
Evolution according to Lamarck is smooth, like according to Darwin, without sharp jumps. IN Soviet time Vavilov’s opponent, Trofim Lysenko, tried to smuggle views close to Lamarxian ones into biology under the label “Soviet creative Darwinism,” which caused considerable harm to science.
However, recent evidence from the field of epigenetic research shows that expression(implementation of information encoded in nucleic acids into protein structures) genes can change under the influence of external factors (the DNA structure itself is not affected), and these changes can be inherited; and also - simply the fact that external factors can cause mutations opens the way neo-Lamarckism. There is no doubt that Lamarck himself believed that man originated from the ape, although he was forced to disguise his views.
The path to evolutionary teaching was irrevocably opened by Charles Robert Darwin (February 12, 1809 – April 19, 1882). During trip around the world On the ship Beagle (1831 - 1836), young Darwin saw evolution in space.
A huge number of animals in different parts of the globe, and most importantly - the Galapagos Islands: the shells of land tortoises, varying in shape, indicating the island of origin - all this contributed to the insight.
The beaks of Galapagos finches were a key moment in Darwin's idea of the variability of species over time.
However, Darwin was in no hurry. He continued to collect facts. The evidence should have been based on materials on selection, for which England has always been famous for its success. Malthus's theory, according to which uncontrolled population growth should lead to famine on Earth, had a major influence on Darwin's teachings and his ideas about the struggle for existence.
Darwin's theory of evolution is a natural product of development capitalist society. It is noteworthy that at the same time as Darwin, 35-year-old Alfred Wallace, a nature researcher in Southeast Asia, came to the same conclusions. In the early summer of 1858, Darwin received a package from the Malay Islands from Wallace, who asked Darwin to consider his, Wallace's, theory of natural selection. Darwin did not even face the question of whether to hide the work of Wallace, who knew nothing about Darwin’s developments, or to publish his own manuscript in advance. Darwin could not act ungentlemanly. He was a man of honor. Darwin was helped out by his friends: geologist Charles Lyell and botanist Joseph Hooker. They recommended that both works—a short extract from Darwin's book and an essay by Wallace—be sent to the Linnean Society as soon as possible. “Dear sir,” they wrote to the secretary of the society. “The enclosed works deal with the question of the formation of varieties, and represent the results of the investigations of two indefatigable naturalists, Mr. Charles Darwin and Mr. Alfred Wallace.” Darwin never tired of telling the public that Wallace's work was better, but Wallace did not lag behind Darwin, he said that better job Darwin... However, as we know, history decided to make Charles Darwin the symbol of evolutionary teaching.
What characterizes the teachings of Charles Darwin? This must be identified immediately in order to understand the relationship of other evolutionary teachings to classical Darwinism. Darwin identified 2 main types of variability: certain (group) And indefinite (individual). With a certain variability, all the offspring of an organism change in a similar way under the influence of environmental factors. Now this variability is called modification or non-hereditary. For example, dwarfism due to lack of food. This type of variability is not inherited.
Uncertain variability is now called hereditary or mutational. The factor of evolution is the latter.
Combinative Darwin did not assign a decisive role to variability (in crossing) in evolution. Other factors of evolution according to Darwin - struggle for existence And natural selection(from the English “selection” - can be translated as “natural selection”). Darwinian evolution is random. Small random changes serve as material for natural selection. If at artificial selection the selector is a person, and he selects qualities that are beneficial to himself, then with natural selection the selector is nature: individuals with qualities useful for survival are preserved and produce offspring. Special mention should be made unconscious selection. A person does not set goals, he, for example, simply does not send good laying hens for meat, and the egg production of chickens increases over generations. Evolution according to Darwin is a slow progressive process, without sudden leaps. Quantity gradually transforms into a new quality. Darwinian evolution has no final, definite goal. Species have a predominantly monophyletic origin, and the evolutionary process develops according to the principle of divergence: species are divided into genera, genera into families, families into orders, orders into classes, etc., like a tree. Microevolution (the formation of new species) and macroevolution (the formation of large taxa, for example, classes) according to Darwin are one process.
We can observe microevolution within species and Darwinian natural selection in nature in real time. Thus, the birch moth butterfly (Biston betularia), common to England, is a classic example. The melanistic form of carbonaria first attracted attention as a rare mutant in 1848 in Manchester. Between 1848 and 1898 the frequency of this form in industrial areas increased rapidly; it has become a common form, while the typical grayish form has become rare. The frequency of the allele responsible for black coloration is estimated to have increased from 1 to 99% in 50 generations from 1848 to 1898. The reason is the appearance of soot and soot on birch trunks due to the growth of industry, which made the light-winged form vulnerable to birds and gave rise to advantage of the form with dark wings. This phenomenon is called industrial melanism.
Darwin's theory quickly gained popularity, but just as quickly, under the pressure of criticism, it lost it. On late XIX- the beginning of the 20th century, very few biologists shared the concept of natural selection, however, the very idea of evolution of the organic world with the advent of Darwin's teaching in their midst was never questioned again. This is Darwin's main merit: he opened the way for evolutionary theory and will be hated by religious apologists until the very end of the era of class society.
In the 20s of the 20th century, the Synthetic Theory of Evolution (STE) was born, which is a synthesis of Darwinism and population genetics and is the dominant paradigm in modern biology. Darwinism is being rehabilitated. The article by S. S. Chetverikov “On some aspects of the evolutionary process from the point of view of modern genetics” (1926) essentially became the core of the future synthetic theory of evolution and the basis for the further synthesis of Darwinism and genetics. In this article, Chetverikov showed the compatibility of the principles of genetics with the theory of natural selection and laid the foundations of evolutionary genetics. The main evolutionary publication of S. S. Chetverikov was translated into English language in the laboratory of J. Haldane, but was never published abroad. In the works of J. Haldane, N.V. Timofeev-Resovsky and F. G. Dobzhansky, the ideas expressed by S. S. Chetverikov spread to the West, where almost simultaneously R. Fisher expressed very similar views on the evolution of dominance. In the English-language literature, among the creators of STE, the names of F. Dobzhansky, J. Huxley, E. Mayr, B. Rensch, J. Stebbins are most often mentioned. This is, of course, far from full list. Only among Russian scientists, at least, I. I. Shmalhausen, N. V. Timofeev-Resovsky, G. F. Gause, N. P. Dubinin, A. L. Takhtadzhyan should be named. Of the British scientists, the great role played by J. B. S. Haldane Jr., D. Lack, K. Waddington, and G. de Beer. German historians name among the active creators of STE the names of E. Baur, W. Zimmermann, W. Ludwig, G. Heberer and others.
The most striking difference between STE and classical Darwinism: the main unit of evolution in it is no longer a separate organism, but a population, i.e., a collection of organisms of the same species existing in a certain territory or water area in free conditions. Panmixia, i.e. gene exchange. Reproductive isolation, for example, geographical (limitation of panmixia due to the appearance of geographical barriers, for example, straits or mountain ranges, which prevents free crossing), or genetic-ethological (differences in behavior, for example, in signals of interaction between partners, interfere with crossing), or any other, leads to speciation. Every population has a certain set of mutations, few of which are beneficial, but most of which are harmful. Therefore, figuratively speaking, the population has many support points in the form of a set of different gene alleles, which increases its stability and provides the opportunity to respond plastically to changes in environmental conditions.
I. I. Shmalgauzen introduced the concepts stabilizing And driving selection. Under constant environmental conditions, all deviations from the norm are eliminated, this is stabilizing selection, but as soon as environmental conditions begin to change, driving selection is activated, and mutant alleles of genes gain an advantage.
I will not dwell on STE in detail, so as not to overload the article, which was intended as popular science. Mathematical models of STE are complex and are, in fact, justifications that explain existing contradictions. I will only note that the basis of STE, as in classical Darwinism, is the concept tychogenesis– evolution based on chance. Microevolution and macroevolution are the same thing, only the scales differ. Evolution has no final goal and is not directed anywhere. Preference is given to divergence and monophyletic origin of species. Evolution, according to STE, is a slow progressive process, without revolutionary leaps.
Sometimes ordinary people's objections to Darwin's teaching revolve around real contradictions. The question of the transitional form between ape and man, of course, cannot cause anything other than bewilderment and regret about the illiteracy of the population.
Another thing is the question of transitional forms between, for example, reptiles and birds... Indeed: well, an ancestor jumped from branch to branch, even if not birds, but flying squirrels, well, a random mutation arose: a small fold of skin. What evolutionary significance could it have? Could such a fold of skin play a decisive role in survival and make jumping more efficient, unless, of course, a large fold with aerodynamic characteristics immediately appeared? The house of cards of Darwin's slow progressive process begins to stagger through small random changes, and it seems that it is about to collapse... Of course, you can approach the problem philosophically: a person has never flown, his brain does not understand the ingenious simplicity of the desire to fly at the level of intuition, and the principle “one born to crawl cannot fly” also applies to the ease of evolutionist thought. And yet, the perfection of the bird’s aerodynamic design is mesmerizing, just like the birds themselves... I don’t know about you, but more than once in steam I dreamed of flying out the window of the top floor, flying over the trees...
Needless to say, the question of macroevolution is a sore point in biology, and until it is closed, one can hardly expect an end to the reactionary chatter in this area. Unfortunately, educated people often indulge themselves in self-deception, as if they understood everything from Darwin, ignoring cognitive dissonance. So, the emergence of the theory nomogenesis– evolution based on the laws of Lev Semenovich Berg (March 2 (15), 1876 - December 24, 1950) can hardly be considered accidental.
A man of encyclopedic knowledge, geographer, geologist, paleontologist, soil scientist, limnologist, ichthyologist, ethnographer, Berg outlined his views on evolution in the book “Nomogenesis, or evolution based on patterns” (Petrograd, 1922), in which he completely contrasted his teaching with Darwin. The evolutionary process according to Berg, unlike Darwin, is not accidental, but natural. The origin of species is polyphyletic - from many thousands of original forms. Subsequently, evolution developed predominantly convergently. As is the case with the shark fish, the reptile ichthyosaur and the mammal dolphin: in the aquatic environment they acquired the same streamlined shape with fins, despite the fact that the ancestors of some were quadrupeds, while others were originally aquatic animals. Evolution according to Berg is not the continuous emergence of new characters, as in Darwin, but to a large extent is the unfolding of already existing inclinations, like a plant from a bud inside a seed, in which leaves, a stem and a root are already identified. Evolution occurs abruptly, in leaps (saltations), simultaneously affecting huge masses of individuals over vast territories, based on de Vries mutations. Species are sharply delimited from one another, and no transitional forms exist. Natural selection and the struggle for existence are not factors of progress, they protect the norm.
In the work “The Law of Homologous Series in Hereditary Variation,” presented in the form of a report at the III All-Russian Selection Congress in Saratov on June 4, 1920, Berg’s like-minded person, Vavilov, introduced the concept of “homologous series in hereditary variability.” Vavilov’s law is formulated as follows: “Genetically close species and genera are characterized by similar series of hereditary variability with such regularity that, knowing the series of forms within one species, one can predict the presence of parallel forms in other species and genera.” The law of homological series, like the periodic system of elements of D. I. Mendeleev in chemistry, allows, based on knowledge general patterns variability to predict the existence in nature of previously unknown forms with traits valuable for breeding. Thus, previously only multi-seeded fruits of sugar beets were known: the seeds grew together into a fruit cluster, a ball, and during germination, excess seedlings had to be removed manually. However, specimens with single-seeded fruits were found in wild beet species. Based on knowledge of Vavilov’s law, researchers began searching for single-seeded mutants in sugar beets; Based on the discovered mutants, modern varieties of this crop were obtained. Nikolai Vavilov also said that “Selection is evolution guided by the will of man.”
The discovery of horizontal gene transfer (see mine) suggests the possibility of the spread of beneficial mutations by viruses among taxonomically distant groups. Why, for example, not admit that saber-toothed animals among various orders and even infraclasses of mammals appeared and died out in tandem, thus, not by chance. Also in favor of Berg's theory is the fact that possible evolutionary directions are limited. Sometimes the corresponding enzyme pathways simply do not exist, which makes, for example, the emergence of blue-furred mammals during the evolutionary process.
A separate position, it should be noted, is occupied by the evolutionary ideas of I. A. Efremov. This researcher recognizes the progressive role of natural selection, but, following Berg, gives preference to convergence. According to Efremov, the higher the energy level homeostasis(maintaining a constant internal environment) in an organism, the narrower the range of possible evolutionary directions. Thus, according to Efremov, evolution is similar to a twisting spiral and has a pronounced finalistic character: it presupposes the ultimate highest goal - man. Efremov goes further and comes to the conclusion about the regularity of the human form for other planets.
“There can be no precocious intelligent life in lower forms like mold, much less a thinking ocean.”
However, Efremov was familiar with Berg’s nomogenesis and there is no need to talk about convergence or random coincidence, as in the case of Darwin and Wallace.
Ivan Efremov Unfortunately, finalism is a loophole for sneaking theistic views into evolutionary theory, which is what V.I. Nazarov takes advantage of. If evolution has a goal, then there must be a creator, the demon of creationism - right there...
One cannot help but dwell on the concept autoevolution cytogenetics Lima de Faria (1991). Briefly speaking, evolution according to Lima de Faria is based on the same patterns that make water freeze in the form of a beautiful snowflake. And Lima de Faria gives in his book “Evolution without Selection” photographs of leaf-shaped pure bismuth in native form and a plant leaf, ice crystals and young shoots of ferns... Galaxies are compared to mollusk shells... This modern form nomogenesis. Self-organization of matter is being studied synergetics.
There have been other attempts to answer the question of how macroevolution was realized. For example, the theory of “hopeful monsters” by Goldschmidt (German: Richard Baruch-Benedikt Goldschmidt; April 12, 1878 – April 24, 1958).
The idea is simple. Macroevolutionary leaps are realized through the appearance of freaks, sharply anomalous forms, similar to Siamese twins, which in most cases have no chance of survival. But sometimes freaks are born hopeful... This is how an ugly, disproportionately large fold of skin in a flying squirrel could have arisen, but the question of how dinosaurs became birds still remains vague...
Theory symbiogenesis(a term first put forward by Merezhkovsky in 1905) is now virtually beyond doubt among biologists. Cell organelles such as chloroplasts or mitochondria were once bacteria-symbionts, i.e. they existed on a mutually beneficial basis (this form of symbiosis is called mutualism) inside the ancestral eukarytic cell, and subsequently lost their independence and became its elements. There is serious evidence for this: mitochondria and plastids have two completely closed membranes. In this case, the outer one is similar to the membranes of vacuoles, the inner one is similar to bacteria. These organelles reproduce by division (and sometimes divide independently of cell division), and are never synthesized de novo. Own genetic material - circular DNA - like bacteria; have their own protein synthesis apparatus - ribosomes, and other evidence. Symbiogenesis is for us at least an example of one of the possible paths of mysterious macroevolution, and this is a non-Darwinian path.
And hereditary information can be transmitted not only through nucleic acids, but also through proteins, for example, prions.
The review of evolutionary theories can be continued for a very long time. Those interested can familiarize themselves, for example, with the book by V. I. Nazarov “Evolution not according to Darwin”, being, of course, critical of what is written there. However, I will end the review here.
But let's go back to the beginning of the article. Born in biology, modern evolutionism soon embraced all other natural Sciences, has become global. But, alas, the sphere of evolutionary theories continues to be an arena of class struggle. Darwin's theory, logical for the world of capitalist competition, unfortunately, often serves as a justification for the market struggle for existence, which is presented as a blessing and a source of progress. Of course, Darwin was a son of his time, he comprehended reality as a man of his formation, but his tasks never included the birth of monsters like social Darwinism, which was decisively condemned by biologists all over the world, social Darwinism, which presupposes natural selection in human society. This is how racists argued their anti-human views, saying that skin color is a Darwinian adaptation? On the contrary, in human society the role of natural selection is reduced to a minimum, and the level mutagenesis due to new technologies (for example, nuclear reactors) is increasing, which requires the rapid development of gene therapy methods. Trofim Lysenko played into the hands of modern liberals: their cries, full of crocodile tears, about why Academician Vavilov was repressed have not ceased to this day. The question remains open about the advisability of considering non-Darwinian theories among schoolchildren. Our education system is designed in such a way that the latter do not have the opportunity to deeply immerse themselves in the world of evolutionary theories, and Darwin in the mass consciousness is a symbol of evolutionary teaching; any criticism of Darwin can be perceived incorrectly, as an argument in favor of chatter from yellow newspapers, they say, Darwin was refuted, and man did not descend from apes.
Behind all this, Efremov’s dreams of meeting beauties from other planets, and the mysteries of prehistoric eras, such as the Cambrian explosion, and the ability of man, as the king of nature, to direct evolution in such a way as to rid the biosphere of all pain are somehow lost... Someday we Let's understand what evolution is, finally. Someday we will see evolution on other planets, and a revolution will take place in our knowledge on this issue, because there will be something to compare with! Some day…
Literature:
- Shakhnovich M. I. Myths about the creation of the world, M.: Znanie, 1968
- Charles Darwin. The origin of species through natural selection or the preservation of favored breeds in the struggle for life, M.: Education, 1987
- Efremov I. A. Space and paleontology, M.: Knowledge, 1972
- Nazarov V.I. Evolution not according to Darwin, M.: LKI, 2007