What is Evolution?
by Laurence Moran
Most non-scientists seem to be quite confused about precise definitions of biological evolution. Such confusion is due in large part to the inability of scientists to communicate effectively to the general public and also to confusion among scientists themselves about how to define such an important term. When discussing evolution it is important to distinguish between the existence of evolution and various theories about the mechanism of evolution. And when referring to the existence of evolution it is important to have a clear definition in mind. What exactly do biologists mean when they say that they have observed evolution or that humans and chimps have evolved from a common ancestor?
One of the most respected evolutionary biologists has defined biological evolution as follows:
"In the broadest sense, evolution is merely change, and so is all-pervasive;
galaxies, languages, and political systems all evolve. Biological evolution
... is change in the properties of populations of organisms that transcend the
lifetime of a single individual. The ontogeny of an individual is not
considered evolution; individual organisms do not evolve. The changes in
populations that are considered evolutionary are those that are inheritable
via the genetic material from one generation to the next. Biological evolution
may be slight or substantial; it embraces everything from slight changes in
the proportion of different alleles within a population (such as those
determining blood types) to the successive alterations that led from the
earliest proto-organism to snails, bees, giraffes, and dandelions."
Douglas J. Futuyma in Evolutionary Biology, Sinauer Associates 1986
It is important to note that biological evolution refers to populations and not to individuals and that the changes must be passed on to the next generation. In practice this means that “Evolution is a process that results in heritable changes in a population spread over many generations”. One can quibble about the accuracy of such a definition but it also conveys the essence of what evolution really is. When biologists say that they have observed evolution, they mean that they have detected a change in the frequency of genes in a population. (Often the genetic change is inferred from phenotypic changes that are heritable.) When biologists say that humans and chimps have evolved from a common ancestor they mean that there have been successive heritable changes in the two separated populations since they became isolated.
Unfortunately the common definitions of evolution outside of the scientific community are different. For example, in the Oxford Concise Science Dictionary we find the following definition:
"evolution: The gradual process by which the present diversity of plant and
animal life arose from the earliest and most primitive organisms, which is
believed to have been continuing for the past 3000 million years."
This is inexcusable for a dictionary of science. Not only does this definition exclude prokaryotes, protozoa, and fungi, but it specifically includes a term "gradual process" which should not be part of the definition. More importantly the definition seems to refer more to the history of evolution than to evolution itself. Using this definition it is possible to debate whether evolution is still occurring, but the definition provides no easy way of distinguishing evolution from other processes. For example, is the increase in height among Caucasians over the past several hundred years an example of evolution? Are the colour changes in the peppered moth population examples of evolution? This is not a scientific definition.
Standard dictionaries are even worse:
"evolution: ...the doctrine according to which higher forms of life have
gradually arisen out of lower.." – Chambers
"evolution: ...the development of a species, organism, or organ from its
original or primitive state to its present or specialized state; phylogeny or
ontogeny" - Webster's
These definitions are simply wrong. Unfortunately it is common for non-scientists to enter into a discussion about evolution with such a definition in mind. This often leads to fruitless debate since the experts are thinking about evolution from a different perspective.
Is this the nub of the present problem? That different people are using different (often wrong) definitions of evolution? Sometimes it does seem that way.
2 comments:
part of the problem is teh misunderstanding of the basic definition of theory.
Creationists tend to think that a theory is unproven, a misunderstanding.
A Theory is in fact a Proven Hypothesis, and a Hypothesis is an expanded idea.
Very true.... added to the fact that they often intentionally misuse the word to make evolution 'look bad'.
That "it's only a theory" jibe is SO old now.....
Creationists often do nothing more than reveal their own ignorance when they say things like that.
Post a Comment