In order to understand real evolution you have to understand speciation. This fact usually comes as a great surprise to adaptationists who tend not to think of such things. (Or, if they do, they adopt a grossly simplified version of speciation based on adaptation.)John Wilkins tries to explain theories of speciation in his latest posting on Evolving Thoughts [Theories of Speciation]. John is a philosopher but don't let that fool you. He's an expert of speciation. The problem is, he explains it like a philosopher. :-)
Here's a nifty chart that I stole from John's article (he published it in his latest paper). If, after looking at the chart, it all becomes crystal clear to you then you have my sympathy. This is a very difficult problem but it can't be swept under the rug if you want to debate hierarchical theory and punctuated equilibria.
2 comments :
If I explained it like a biologist, then nobody would understand it.
In order to understand real evolution you have to understand speciation.
I would've said it the other way round: in order to understand speciation, you first have to understand evolution. What evolution is, and also what evolution isn't. Speciation is really nothing more or less than the simplest possible example of evolution producing permanent, easily-identified changes in a lineage of organisms. If you understand evolution, you can understand how speciation works in all its many forms. If you don't, you can't.
Of course, since no one has yet produced a reliable, consistent definition of a species, understanding speciation is not as simple as it first appears... ;-)
Post a Comment