Education in Evolution and Science Through Laboratory Activities

Evolution is the unifying framework for the science of biology. [...] It likewise demands an equally dominant role in biology education. [...] Simultaneously it is the most important, the most misunderstood, and most maligned concept in the syllabus—if it even appears in the syllabus (Investigating Evolutionary Biology in the Laboratory, by William F. McComas (ed.). Dubuque (Iowa): Kendall-Hunt, 2006. pp. vi + 388. s/b $ 41, 99)

Come ripensare la teoria evoluzionistica. Una pluralità di pattern evolutivi

Recentemente, sulla rivista «Nature», i progressi empirici della teoria dell’evoluzione sono stati descritti nei termini di un confronto tra «riformisti», i quali auspicano una revisione dell’approccio neodarwiniano standard attraverso l’inclusione di fattori e processi fino ad ora trascurati, e «conservatori», secondo i quali l’attuale programma di ricerca evoluzionistico, basato sulla variazione genetica e sulla selezione naturale, «va bene così». Il dissidio, che concerne principalmente il problema del riduzionismo genetico, sembra non portare a nessun risultato. I riformisti mettono in luce dei fattori molto importanti, ma paiono non portare ancora nessuna proposta coerente quanto alla struttura di questa versione estesa della teoria evoluzionistica a venire. I conservatori si mettono sulla difensiva, facendo affidamento soltanto su quelle aggiunte che non modificano il nucleo neodarwiniano quanto ai suoi tratti essenziali, mantenendolo ben saldo nei vecchi connotati. Analizziamo qui il suddetto dibattito, proponendone un’interpretazione. La biologia evoluzionistica è un campo di ricerche in rapida espansione. L’oggetto del contendere è la modalità di estendere e aggiornare il nucleo centrale dell’eredità darwiniana. La nostra ipotesi è che, nel campo della biologia evoluzionistica attuale, si stia producendo un avanzamento del programma di ricerca, la cui struttura è composta da una serie di pattern evolutivi integrabili e compatibili tra di loro. Nel corso della sua storia la biologia evoluzionistica si è infatti accresciuta tramite l’inclusione progressiva di modelli diversi, senza che questo significasse una revisione del nucleo della teoria. La «teoria gerarchica» di Niles Eldredge è un esempio di struttura globale (metateoria) che si propone come fine quello di incorporare e unificare i pattern evoluzionistici attualmente accettati.Recentemente, sulla rivista «Nature», i progressi empirici della teoria dell’evoluzione sono stati descritti nei termini di un confronto tra «riformisti», i quali auspicano una revisione dell’approccio neodarwiniano standard attraverso l’inclusione di fattori e processi fino ad ora trascurati, e «conservatori», secondo i quali l’attuale programma di ricerca evoluzionistico, basato sulla variazione genetica e sulla selezione naturale, «va bene così». Il dissidio, che concerne principalmente il problema del riduzionismo genetico, sembra non portare a nessun risultato. I riformisti mettono in luce dei fattori molto importanti, ma paiono non portare ancora nessuna proposta coerente quanto alla struttura di questa versione estesa della teoria evoluzionistica a venire. I conservatori si mettono sulla difensiva, facendo affidamento soltanto su quelle aggiunte che non modificano il nucleo neodarwiniano quanto ai suoi tratti essenziali, mantenendolo ben saldo nei vecchi connotati. Analizziamo qui il suddetto dibattito, proponendone un’interpretazione. La biologia evoluzionistica è un campo di ricerche in rapida espansione. L’oggetto del contendere è la modalità di estendere e aggiornare il nucleo centrale dell’eredità darwiniana. La nostra ipotesi è che, in campo biologico, si stia producendo un avanzamento del programma di ricerca evoluzionistico, la cui struttura è composta da una serie di pattern evolutivi integrabili e compatibili tra di loro. Nel corso della sua storia la biologia evoluzionistica si è infatti accresciuta tramite l’inclusione progressiva di modelli diversi, senza che questo significasse una revisione del nucleo della teoria. La «teoria gerarchica» di Niles Eldredge è un esempio di struttura globale (metateoria) che si propone come fine quello di incorporare e unificare i pattern evoluzionistici attualmente accettati.

Bucket thinking:the future framework for evolutionary explanation

ABSTRACTThe hierarchical interplay between ecology and genealogy is a fundamental ingredient for the most compelling current explanations in evolutionary biology. Yet philosophy of biology has hardly welcomed a classic fundamental intuition by palaeontologist Niles Eldredge, i.e. the non-coincidence and interrelation between ecology and genealogy, and their interaction in a Sloshing Bucket fashion. Hierarchy Theory and the Sloshing Bucket need to be made precise, developed and updated in light of an explosion of new discoveries and fields and philosophical issues. They also suggests re-thinking concepts such as natural selection, species, and speciation that have always been part of evolutionary theory.KEYWORDSEVOLUTION, ECOLOGY, HIERARCHY THEORY, SLOSHING BUCKET, HOMO SAPIENSRESUMENLa interacción jerárquica entre ecología y genealogía es un ingrediente fundamental de las más convincentes explicaciones de la biología evolucionista en la actualidad. Sin embargo, la filosofía de la biología apenas ha acogido una intuición fundamental y clásica debida al paleontólogo Niles Eldredge, a saber: la no-coincidencia e interrelación entre la ecología y la genealogía, y su interacción a modo de cubeta rebosante. La Teoría de la Jerarquía y la de la Cubeta Rebosante necesitan mayor precisión, así como un ulterior desarrollo y acutalización a la luz de la explosión de nuevos descubrimientos y campos y de cuestiones filosóficas. Siguieren asimismo la necesidad de repensar conceptos tales como selección natural, especie y especiación, que han formado siempre parte de la teoría evolucionista.PALABRAS CLAVEEVOLUCIÓN, ECOLOGÍA, TEORÍA DE LA JERARQUÍA, CUBETA REBOSANTE, HOMO SAPIEN

Pan‐Africanism vs. single‐origin of Homo sapiens: Putting the debate in the light of evolutionary biology

The scenario of Homo sapiens origin/s within Africa has become increasingly complex, with a pan-African perspective currently challenging the long-established single-origin hypothesis. In this paper, we review the lines of evidence employed in support of each model, highlighting inferential limitations and possible terminological misunderstandings. We argue that the metapopulation scenario envisaged by pan-African proponents well describes a mosaic diversification among late Middle Pleistocene groups. However, this does not rule out a major contribution that emerged from a single population where crucial derived features—notably, a globular braincase—appeared as the result of a punctuated, cladogenetic event. Thus, we suggest that a synthesis is possible and propose a scenario that, in our view, better reconciles with consolidated expectations in evolutionary theory. These indicate cladogenesis in allopatry as an ordinary pattern for the origin of a new species, particularly during phases of marked climatic and environmental instability

Open data, Science and Society: launching Oasis, the flagship initiative of the Istituto Italiano di Antropologia

The Open Data philosophy has gained considerable momentum in recent years, both in society and the scientific community. The accessibility via web of open data from the public sector has remarkably increased in the last decade, although there are substantial differences among nations (http://datacatalogs.org/). The expectation of many citizens, organizations and pressure groups (the so called “open government” movement) is that the free release of data from public administrations may help increase government transparency and accountability

Italian natural history museums on the verge of collapse?

The Italian natural history museums are facing a critical situation, due to the progressive loss of scientific relevance, decreasing economic investments, and scarcity of personnel. This is extremely alarming, especially for ensuring the long-term preservation of the precious collections they host. Moreover, a commitment in fieldwork to increase scientific collections and concurrent taxonomic research are rarely considered priorities, while most of the activities are addressed to public events with political payoffs, such as exhibits, didactic meetings, expositions, and talks. This is possibly due to the absence of a national museum that would have better steered research activities and overall concepts for collection management. We here propose that Italian natural history museums collaborate to instate a “metamuseum”, by establishing a reciprocal interaction network aimed at sharing budgetary and technical resources, which would assure better coordination of common long-term goals and scientific activities

Geoethics and philosophy of Earth sciences: the role of geophysical factors in human evolution

This article explores the role of philosophy of the Earth sciences in the foundation of the principles of ‘geoethics’. In particular, the focus is on two different examples of philosophical analysis in the field of geosciences: the first is the trial against the Italian National Commission for Forecasting and Predicting Great Risks, which was charged with negligence in communication and prediction on the occasion of the earthquake that almost destroyed the city of L’Aquila on the night of April 6, 2009; the second is related to the scientific and theoretical consequences of the updated geographical scenario of the human global populating of the Earth, based on archeological, paleontological and genetic data. Our concept of ‘scientific prediction’ in the case of geophysical phenomena and the new ways to see human evolution that depend on geophysical factors have ethical and philosophical implications that are crucial for the foundations of geoethics. The tentative conclusion is that we need an evolutionary sense of belonging to our Planet, and a concept of ‘natural’ phenomena and ‘natural’ disasters that should not be an alibi for the underestimation of our political and ethical responsibilitie

La souveraine incertitude de l'évolution

It is in the uncertainty of evolution that the creative force of unexpected and undirected change is located. In this paper we examine the focal notion of "contingence", by choosing as our starting point the most recent scientific discoveries in the field of natural history. Contingence differs from the notion of " hazard " and is not incompatible with the presence, in biological evolution, of patterns akin to laws. The history of life is intelligible, yet it is intrinsically uncertain : a fascinating exploration of possibilities.C'est dans l'incertitude de l'évolution que se trouve la force créatrice du changement, imprévisible et non dirigé. Nous examinerons ici la notion cruciale de «contingence », à partir des découvertes scientifiques les plus récentes qui ont été faites en histoire naturelle. La contingence se distingue de la notion de «hasard » et n'est pas incompatible avec la présence, dans l'évolution biologique, de modèles semblables à des lois. L'histoire de la vie est intelligible, mais cependant intrinsèquement incertaine : une fascinante exploration de possibilités.Es en la incertidumbre de la evolución que se encuentra la fuerza creativa del cambio, imprevisible y no dirigido. Aquí examinaremos la noción crucial de «contingencía » a partir de los descubrimientos científicos los mas recientes que se han realizados en la historia natural. La contingencia se distingue de la noción de «azar» y no es incompatible con la presencia, en la evolución biológica, de modelos iguales a las leyes. La historia de la vida es inteligible, pero sin embargo intrínsecamente incierta : una fascinante exploración de las posibilidades.Pievani Telmo. La souveraine incertitude de l'évolution. In: Communications, 95, 2014. Les incertitudes, sous la direction de Alfredo Pena-Vega . pp. 9-18

Evolution and creation in the arena of scientific communication (Italian original version)

The debate on Darwin’s theory of evolution is a unique case for observing some particular ways in which science is perceived and experienced in society. It is a dispute which is really not very scientific at all, since it ultimately derives from the attempt to discredit a corroborated scientific explanation (and to limit its teaching) by fundamentalist fringe groups of religious and political movements of various extraction. However, it is undeniable that the clash between creationists and evolutionists must also involve, in a critical and self-reflective way, the communicative weaknesses of science and its inability to assert itself as a widespread and fully shared culture, as was also stressed by the Nature magazine in April 2005. With an international viewpoint, ranging from the United States to Europe, from Australia to Italy, in this dossier we try to make a summary investigation of the current state of the debate, with a particularly attentive eye on the communicative strategies that contend in the two fields

Evolution and creation in the arena of scientific communication

The debate on Darwin’s theory of evolution is a unique case for observing some particular ways in which science is perceived and experienced in society. It is a dispute which is really not very scientific at all, since it ultimately derives from the attempt to discredit a corroborated scientific explanation (and to limit its teaching) by fundamentalist fringe groups of religious and political movements of various extraction. However, it is undeniable that the clash between creationists and evolutionists must also involve, in a critical and self-reflective way, the communicative weaknesses of science and its inability to assert itself as a widespread and fully shared culture, as was also stressed by the Nature magazine in April 2005. With an international viewpoint, ranging from the United States to Europe, from Australia to Italy, in this dossier we try to make a summary investigation of the current state of the debate, with a particularly attentive eye on the communicative strategies that contend in the two fields