Darwin's artificial selection analogy and the generic character of "phyletic" evolution.
This paper examines the way Charles Darwin applied his domestic breeding analogy to the practical workings of species evolution: that application, it is argued, centered on Darwin's distinction between methodical and unconscious selection. Methodical selection, which entailed pairing particular individuals for mating purposes, represented conditions of strict geographic isolation, obviously useful for species multiplication (speciation). By contrast, unconscious selection represented an open landmass with a large breeding population. Yet Darwin held that this latter scenario, which often would include multiple ecological subdistricts and thus partial isolation, was better suited for speciation than were isolated conditions. At the same time, many passages in Darwin's writings that apparently portrayedphyletic evolution exclusively (these including references to unconscious selection), actually applied to speciation as well, for phyletic change in a single district could constitute a local manifestation of a larger common-descent pattern. This generic use of "phyletic" change was reflected in Darwin's deployment of the unconscious selection analogy in his published writings as well as in his dispute with Moritz Wagner over the necessity of geographic isolation for speciation. We can thus understand Darwin's otherwise puzzling declaration in The Origin of Species that unconscious selection was 'more important' than the methodical approach.
Alter
Stephen G
SG
Gordon College, 255 Grapevine Road, Wenham, MA 01984, USA.
D001947:Breeding / Q000266:history*; D004641:Emigration and Immigration / Q000266:history*; D049810:Genetic Speciation; D005828:Genetics, Population; D005843:Geography; D049672:History, 19th Century; D006801:Humans; D011643:Publishing; D013045:Species Specificity