The Extended Synthesis

Telic Thoughts posts this discussion of the new thinking about evolution being done by biologists in light of ever increasing fossil and genomic evidence. Random mutation and natural selection have been the focus of evolutionary research for much of the theory’s existence, but we now need to take a look at additional change-inducing factors that may complement or even overshadow the role of RM and NS. Read here.

The impetus for the Extended Synthesis, a graft onto, or a major departure from, the Modern Synthesis (depending on who is describing it), was the overwhelming data generated in recent years that just didn’t fit the old formula. Phenomena like self-organization, epigenetics and plasticity intruded in ways that were complementary to, and sometimes contradictory to, natural selection. Then there was niche construction to consider–where organisms invent their habitats (burrows, bird nests, bee hives, etc.) rather than being selected by their fitness to pre-existing ones. And also punctuated evolution, abrupt transitions in the fossil record, and the even more puzzling episodes of stasis.

While much of the evolutionary biology community resists the notion of an evolutionary framework that begins to consider the role of determinants beyond the gene, as the Extended Synthesis does, the momentum of the new synthesis is undeniable (see Google for “the Altenberg 16″). And there are other scientists and philosophers of science–avowed non-creationists–who say the Extended Synthesis does not go far enough in relegating natural selection to a reduced role.