Although Darwin's Origin of Species has been published for more than one hundred years, since the middle of this century, both Darwin and Darwinism, as well as evolutionary biology itself, have made rapid development. However, at present, many people in China still have serious misunderstandings about the theory of evolution, some of which originated from Engels' exposition on evolution. For example, evolution is regarded as progress, and biological evolution is still regarded as a change from low to high. This view is not really Darwinism, and it is also far from the modern evolutionary view.

Keywords: evolutionary progress Darwinism

1959, the famous American geneticist H.J. Muller lamented at a meeting commemorating the centenary of the publication of Darwin's On the Origin of Species: "A hundred years will be the same without Darwin", in view of people's simple and one-sided understanding of Darwin's theory of evolution in the past hundred years and the slow development of evolution. [1] Another 37 years have passed. I think, if Mill knew the current situation of Darwinism and evolution in China, he would make the same exclamation.

Let alone China's current neglect of the research and teaching of Chairman Darwin and the theory of evolution [1], our understanding and acceptance of Darwinism and contemporary biological evolution are far behind Europe and America. More specifically, many people's knowledge and understanding of what is evolution, the most basic problem in evolution, still stays at the level of 100 years ago, which of course has many misunderstandings. Dialectics of Nature No.4 1995 "On Engels' Theory of Evolution of Material Form" provides us with such an example (just indicate the page number when quoting this article below). However, as we will see below, there are many people in China who share the same or similar views with the author of this article. Therefore, our discussion of evolution is of universal significance. It's not about someone, but about the problem itself.

one

The article "On Engels' Theory of Evolution of Material Form" puts forward that "evolution is the same as the revolutionary change, rising development and mutual transformation of things". And that this is the "first objective fact", "so, semantically speaking,' evolution' is simply called' progress and change'". (page 23)

From the perspective of Chinese semantics, "evolution" can really remind people of "progress and change". However, this kind of understanding is obviously a matter of looking at the creative significance of literature. Because "evolution" is a purely foreign word, it is also translated as "evolution" (the author thinks that "evolv" is a more appropriate translation than "evolution" according to modern evolutionary biology), and its root word "evolv" means "rolling" in Latin. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word "evolution" was first used in life science in 1670, but it was basically limited to embryology until the beginning of 19 century, and was roughly used to express the unfolding potential in embryonic development, that is, to express the organic development of embryos. 〔2〕

This is one of the reasons why Lamarck and Darwin, the two founders of scientific evolution theory, seldom use the word "evolution" because they are easily confused with the familiar usage of "evolution" at that time. When describing the evolution of living things, Lamarck used "transform isme isme" more clearly [2], while Darwin often used "modified bloodline". ([3], [4], page 34)

In Darwin's time, it was not Darwin who used the word "evolution" the loudest, but herbert spencer. However, Spencer's usage of "evolution" is not strictly Darwin's theory, but has the meaning of forward change, and mainly through him, the word "evolution" is widely used in social sciences. [5]

Even in terms of theoretical connotation, Lamarck's and Darwin's evolutionism does not completely contain the meaning of "revolutionary change, upward development and mutual transformation".

First of all, it should be pointed out that the "revolutionary change" or "revolutionary change" at the end of 18 and the beginning of 2009 has its specific meaning in the field of life science. Georges cuvier, the founder of catastrophe theory, used the word "revolution" to explain the discontinuity of vertebrates in strata and the catastrophe of organisms in geological history. ([5], page106-12). Lamarck's theory and Darwin's theory have few similarities, including that they are clearly opposed to "catastrophe" (or "revolutionary change" used at that time), and they all believe in Hutton's maxim that "nature has not made a leap", and Darwin is firm. [6] And Engels' view that "nature is completely composed of leaps" shows that he did not learn the latest scientific achievements at that time to look at the continuity and discontinuity of natural changes. [3] In addition, Lamarck and Darwin never put forward the view that biological evolution is "mutual transformation". Try a simple example. According to Lamarck and Darwin's theory of evolution, mammals originated from reptiles. If evolution is reciprocal, it means that reptiles also originated from mammals. There is no such example of biological evolution in nature. As for whether biological evolution is "ascending development", it does have such a meaning in Lamarck's theory, but it is almost absent in Darwin's theory of evolution.

Modern mainstream scientific evolutionism inherits the Darwinian tradition (that is, comprehensive evolutionism, also known as neo-Darwinism), and integrates the achievements of modern genetics, systematics, paleontology, embryology, ecology, animal and plant geography, animal behavior and so on, and has a newer and more thorough understanding of biological evolution. No matter according to the widely used definition of "evolution" put forward by Meyer, one of the important representatives of comprehensive evolution theory, or according to the definition of "evolution is the change of gene frequency in a population" insisted by many geneticists [7] pp. 162- 163), "evolution". That is, from the semantic point of view, "evolution" does not mean "forward change"

two

The article "On Engels' Theory of Evolution of Material Form" puts forward that "in this theory of evolution [referring to Darwin's], biological change is not only a simple change of species and quantity, but also a progressive development process from low to high and from simple to complex. ..... The scientific meaning of the concept of' evolution' refers to the continuous evolution, transformation and development of things from low to high "(page 23). There are also many people who hold the same evolutionary view in China. This can only be seen from several textbooks of dialectics of nature in colleges and universities in recent ten years. Lectures on Dialectics of Nature published by People's Education Publishing House 1979 pointed out: "The theory of evolution reveals the natural picture of biological development from low to high with a large number of facts" (22 pages), and animals and plants experienced the development from low to high (7 1 page); 1984 Shu Weiguang's Principles of Dialectics of Nature, published by Jilin People's Publishing House, also said: "In the process of biological evolution, it has experienced development from low to high" (478 pages); However, the latest edition of Introduction to Dialectics of Nature, edited by Chen Changshu of Northeastern University Press (1995), still thinks that the evolution of organisms has a direction from low to high (80-82 pages). In addition, in the Essays on Dialectics of Nature published by People's Publishing House 1983, we can see that even scholars like Fang Zongxi who have been engaged in the teaching and research of biological evolution for many years look at biological evolution from a low-level and high-level perspective (258 pages). This view is obviously a misinterpretation of Darwin's theory of evolution.

Darwin's theory of evolution has rich connotations. [8] He regards the evolution of living things as the process of alienation of living things (to be exact, species). In this process, organisms change from simple to complex, leading to an increase in biodiversity. Darwin believed that biological evolution was a two-stage process. The first stage is the generation of random (non-directional) mutation, which is a completely accidental process. The second stage is the role of natural selection. As a result, the adaptive variation is retained, while the unsuitable variation is eliminated ([3], page 80-8 1). This stage can be regarded as a directional and inevitable process, but the standard of measurement is only biological adaptation. According to Darwin, adaptation is the final result of biological evolution. In this theoretical framework, contingency and inevitability have truly reached unity. The appearance of living creatures and human beings is the result of countless accidents and natural selection in the long river of life evolution at every stage, at every specific time and in a specific environment. It is not the "nature of matter" that determines the necessity of "developing thinking creatures" (Dialectics of Nature Newsletter 1995, No.4, p.25). Similarly, in contrast, Engels' so-called "the solar system and the earth may be destroyed, but there will be a new assembly process, and planets, creatures and humans will reappear" obviously lacks factual and theoretical basis and can only be regarded as a fantasy. In addition, according to Darwin's evolutionary framework, the evolutionary view of "from low level to high level" is unnecessary. Furthermore, "low level", "advanced level" and "progress" are the standards of anthropocentrism. An important feature of Darwin's theory lies in its thorough materialistic connotation, including completely abandoning anthropocentrism to judge whether organisms have evolved. This is an obvious difference between Darwin's theory and predecessors' theory of evolution and western traditional concepts. [9] At the same time, this is also the reason why he didn't publish his views on evolution (delayed for 20 years), and it is also the reason why his theory eventually caused great controversy. ([4], page 265438+0-27)

Biology, even the whole nature, is divided into high and low. This view can be traced back to Plato's idealism and further improved by Aristotle, thus forming the theory of "scala naturae". Aristotle believes that everything in nature can be divided into different grades according to its material and formal reasons, which constitutes a static natural grade. At this level, inorganic matter is low and organic matter is high; In organic matter, plants are inferior, animals are superior, and humans are the highest. In the late Middle Ages, this concept was combined with scholasticism and secular social and political theory, which became the theoretical basis for Christian churches and feudal nobles to explain the social hierarchy difference. 17-18th century, Aristotle's concept of natural hierarchy was transformed into a "big chain of existence" [10], and more and more people think that the connection between this chain is not fixed. By the end of18th century, this huge chain was not static, and it was widely known that there was progress (or progress) in it. [ 10]、[ 1 1]

Lamarck's theory of evolution is formed according to this theoretical framework. Lamarck admits that there is a hierarchical sequence from lower organisms to higher organisms in nature, in which human beings are the highest. But Lamarck believes that such a sequence is not static, but has a progressive (or gradual) evolutionary change, that is, every link in the chain will undergo essential changes, specifically, the species itself will change, and the changing trend is from simple to complex, from low to high ([2], page 60). This is an important point different from Leibniz and others. The revelation of biological potential put forward by Leibniz and others does not involve the essential changes of organisms. When talking about the mechanism of biological evolution, Lamarck pointed out that in addition to the role of environment, acquired inheritance, utilization and waste, and natural occurrence, there is also an internal drive to perfection ([12], pp. 222-250). It should be pointed out that the social Darwinism prevailing in Europe and America in the second half of the19th century contains many elements of Lamarckian theory, such as acquired inheritance, the direct effect of environment on biological variation, utilization and abandonment, and the internal motivation of biological evolution towards perfection and progress. ([5], pp. 266-274) Engels' view on the evolution of material form is obviously greatly influenced by social Darwinism. [13] Social Darwinism also spread to China with the theory of evolution at the end of last century [14]. In addition, Michulin, lysenko and other former Soviet scholars' views on evolution with strong Lamarckianism are widely publicized in China, and there are still traces of Lamarckianism in some China people's understanding of evolution.

Darwin showed people a brand-new and rigorous theoretical system with his firm inference and rich basis, which explained the biological adaptation, harmony and biological changes and differences in geological history more reasonably, thus bringing about a revolution in the history of science. [9]

Darwin realized in the early stage of his theory of evolution (1837- 1838) that the evolution of organisms cannot be explained from a lower and higher level. "When we talk about higher levels, we always talk about higher levels of intelligence-but when we face the earth covered with beautiful grasslands and forests, it is hard to think that intelligence is the only purpose of this world." [15] Later, he told himself more clearly that he would never use the words "advanced and low" again. ([7], p.25 1) is inherited by most modern evolutionary biologists. Indeed, as Gould, a famous modern evolutionist, said, "If amoebas adapt to the living environment like us, who can say that we are advanced creatures?" ([4], page 36) If people are not taken as the reference standard, it will be more difficult to distinguish between low-level and high-level. For example, cartilaginous fish appeared earlier than bony fish. According to Lamarckism, social Darwinism and exhibition, cartilaginous fish are considered to be inferior and bony fish are advanced, but they can adapt to the environment. From the position in the food chain, it is difficult to think that the shark as a cartilaginous fish is lower than the cod as a bony fish, so it is considered that evolution is "a gradual development process from low to high", which is neither Darwin's evolution theory nor modern scientific achievements, but only Lamarckian evolution theory replaced by Darwin's theory or optimistic progressive theory of thinkers during the Enlightenment.

three

It is true that Darwin's talk about biological evolution was not completely divorced from his time. He used "progress" 10 times and "perfection" 123 times in the Origin of Species. [3] But when he uses these words, he seldom has the color of anthropocentrism. When he used the word "progress", he didn't mean the perfect development and progress of organisms, but the process of time. ([7], page 240) In the Origin of Species, Darwin used the word "progress", which means development and improvement, but he said, "I can't find a way to test this progress." ([3], p. 337) When Darwin used the word "perfection", it was mainly used to explain that under the action of natural selection, creatures adapted to their living environment more perfectly, not in terms of hierarchy. ([3] Chapter 6, [7], p. 240-24 1 page) When social Darwinists such as Spencer use the words "evolution", "progress" and "perfection", they are quite different from Darwin's usage, which contains the meaning of rising from a lower level to a higher level based on the continuous improvement of people or intelligence. [5][ 16] When Engels used these words, their meanings were more similar to Spencer's usage. The concept of "evolution" in this usage is not a concept of scientific evolution in a strict sense.

Since the middle of19th century, the concept of "evolution" has expanded from life science to astronomy, geology, physics, chemistry, social science and humanities. In this spreading process, the concept of "evolution" has changed greatly, which is different from Darwin's original meaning when explaining biological changes. Today, the word "evolution" is widely used to describe the changes in human history, politics and economy, but its meaning is basically that things change with time and are one-way, and even some evolutions can determine the direction in advance. In addition to the change of time, the evolution of organisms is not one-way, but bifurcated, and the direction of biological evolution can not be determined in advance. ([17], page 5) In other words, up to now, the scientific community has not formed a unified theory about the evolution of matter forms. In fact, even in the field of biology, there is no consensus on the evolution of life itself. In this way, Engels' unified theory on the evolution of material form, which is quoted above and recognized by many people at present, is too optimistic and lacks basis.

The theories of Marx and Engels are undoubtedly priceless wealth dedicated to mankind. The best way to inherit this wealth is to enrich it with spiritual and cultural achievements (including the latest scientific achievements) obtained by the development of the times, rather than sticking to outdated dogmas.

refer to

H.J. Mill, "A hundred years without Darwin is enough". Humanist,19:139—149, 1959.

[2] J.B. Lamarck, Animal Philosophy (1809). Translated by H. Eliot, London,1914; Reprinted by the University of Chicago, 1984.

[3] C. Darwin, Origin of Species (1859), fax of the first edition, edited. Harvard University Press, 1964.

[4] S.J. Gould, since Darwin, W.W. Norton, 1977.

[5] P.J. Bowler, Evolution-A History of Thought, University of California Press, 1984.

[6] E. Meyer, The Growth of Biological Thought. Harvald Dunev. Press, 1982.

[7] E.Mayr, Towards a New Philosophy of Biology, HarvardUniv. Press, 1988.

[8] edited by Cohen. Darwin's Legacy, Princeton University Press, 1985.

[9] M.Ruse, Darwin Revolution, University of Chicago Press, 1979.

[10] a.o. Lovejoy, the big chain of existence, 1936. Reprinted: Harper, 1960.

Mei Sen: History of Natural Science, Chapter 28, translated by Zhou Xiliang, Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 1984.

E.Mayr, Evolution and Diversity of Life, HarvardUniv. Press, 1976.

[13] R.M.Young, "Darwinism is social", in [8], pp. 609-638, 1985.

[14] Li Peishan: Social Darwinism and China's Darwinian Evolution Theory, Dialectics of Nature Newsletter 199 1, 3: 29-32.

Herbert Ed and Charles Pavin's red notebook, B252. Cornell University Press, 1979.

M.Ruse，Laking Darwin Serously，Basil Blackwell， 1986。

Evolution M.Ridley, Blackwell, 1993.

For reference only, please learn by yourself.

I hope it helps you.