Will epigenetics along with orthogenetic and structuralism dethrone Darwin?


The number of orthogenetic and structuralist discoveries needed to dethrone Darwinian evolution is a matter of debate. Some scientists believe that a single, definitive discovery could overthrow Darwinism, while others believe that it would take a number of discoveries to challenge the theory's central tenets.

Orthogenesis is the idea that evolution is directed towards a specific goal or end point. Structuralism is the idea that the evolution of organisms is constrained by their physical structure. Both orthogenesis and structuralism are seen as alternatives to Darwinian evolution, which holds that evolution is driven by natural selection.

There have been a number of orthogenetic and structuralist discoveries in recent years, but none of them have been seen as definitive enough to dethrone Darwinism. However, some scientists believe that a combination of these discoveries could eventually lead to a paradigm shift in our understanding of evolution.

For example, the discovery of homeoboxes, which are genes that control the development of body plans, has led some scientists to believe that there may be an underlying blueprint for evolution. Additionally, the discovery of deep homology, which is the similarity between unrelated organisms, has led some scientists to believe that there may be a common ancestor for all life on Earth.

It is still too early to say whether these discoveries will eventually lead to the overthrow of Darwinian evolution. However, they do provide some evidence that orthogenesis and structuralism may play a role in evolution. Only time will tell whether these discoveries will be enough to dethrone Darwinism.

In addition to the discoveries mentioned above, there are a number of other orthogenetic and structuralist discoveries that could potentially challenge Darwinism. For example, the discovery of epigenetics, which is the study of how environmental factors can influence gene expression, could provide evidence that evolution is not as deterministic as Darwinism suggests. Additionally, the discovery of punctuated equilibrium, which is the idea that evolution occurs in rapid bursts, could provide evidence that Darwinian gradualism is not the only way that evolution can occur.

Both orthogenesis and structuralist evolution are overlooked  by modern biologists. However, some aspects of these theories have been incorporated into the modern synthesis of evolution, which is the prevailing theory of evolution today. For example, the modern synthesis recognizes that the physical constraints of the organism's body plan can limit the range of possible evolutionary changes.

Here is a table that summarizes the key differences between orthogenesis and structuralist evolution:

Feature

Orthogenesis

Structuralist evolution

Driving force

Internal force or "driving force"

Physical constraints of the organism's body plan

Goal of evolution

Increasing biological complexity

Not necessarily increasing biological complexity

Acceptance by modern biologists

Rejected

Some aspects incorporated into the modern synthesis

Orthogenesis and structuralist evolution are consistent with epigenetics, which is the study of changes in gene expression that are not caused by changes in the DNA sequence.

Epigenetics can provide a mechanism for how these theories of orthogenesis and structuralist evolution could work. For example, if an organism experiences a certain environmental condition, this could cause epigenetic changes that lead to the expression of genes that are involved in a particular developmental pathway. This could then lead to the evolution of a new trait that is consistent with the orthogenetic or structuralist trend.

Of course, epigenetic changes are not deterministic. They can be influenced by the environment, but they can also be reversed. This means that orthogenesis and structuralist evolution are not inevitable, but they can be important factors in shaping the course of evolution.

Here are some examples of how epigenetics could be involved in orthogenetic and structuralist evolution:

  • Increase in complexity: Epigenetic changes could lead to the expression of genes that are involved in the development of new structures or organs. This could lead to an increase in the complexity of an organism over time.

  • Increase in size: Epigenetic changes could lead to the expression of genes that are involved in growth. This could lead to an increase in the size of an organism over time.

  • Increase in efficiency: Epigenetic changes could lead to the expression of genes that are involved in the metabolism or energy production of an organism. This could lead to an increase in the efficiency of an organism over time.

It is important to note that these are just a few examples. There are many other ways that epigenetics could be involved in orthogenetic and structuralist evolution. More research is needed to understand the full extent of this relationship.

Ultimately, the number of orthogenetic and structuralist discoveries needed to dethrone Darwinian evolution is a matter of debate. However, the discoveries that have been made so far do provide some evidence that orthogenesis and structuralism may play a role in evolution. Only time will tell whether these discoveries will be enough to dethrone Darwinism.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Beyond the Sequence: The Epigenetic "Fingers" That Play the DNA Keyboard

Image
Imagine the keyboard itself is not a standard piano keyboard, but a modular synthesizer, capable of producing an almost infinite array of sounds. The DNA sequence, then, represents the fundamental building blocks of this synthesizer, the raw materials from which all sounds are generated. Epigenetics, our "fingers," manipulates these building blocks, adjusting parameters like volume, timbre, and rhythm, transforming the raw potential of the DNA sequence into a symphony of cellular functions. We can further refine the "fingers" analogy. Consider that each finger represents a distinct epigenetic mechanism: DNA methylation, histone modifications, and non-coding RNA.  DNA methylation, for instance, might be the "index finger," capable of precisely silencing specific genes, like muting individual keys on the synthesizer. Histone modifications, the "middle finger," could represent the ability to adjust the accessibility of the DN...
Read more

Why are Christian philosophers running towards Darwin while biologists are "running" away?

Image
As nature reveals the strength of epigenetics and the weakness of Neo-Darwinism, biologists are “running” away from the long-standing accepted theory. In The Federalist , April 2019, Benjamin Dierker reviews “Why one-third of biologists now question Darwinism”: "Current estimates are that approximately one-third of professional academic biologists who do not believe in intelligent design find Darwin’s Theory inadequate to describe all of the complexity in biology.” Dierker continues, “The important note is that these are not ideologues or religious zealots, nor do they propose a god or biblical solution.  Rather, they find problems in the lack of explanatory power of Darwin’s theory in light of modern understanding of mutation, variation, DNA sequencing and more. These expressions of doubt do not reject naturalism or evolution per se, but the rigor of the Neo-Darwinian model for explaining the development of life.” For 40 years, scientists calculated natural se...
Read more

Rewriting the Rules: Epigenomic Mutation Bias Challenges Randomness in Evolution

Image
This research challenges the long-held dogma that mutations occur randomly, irrespective of their consequences, by demonstrating a clear, epigenome-mediated mutation bias in Arabidopsis thaliana . The study meticulously unveils how mutation rates are not uniform across the genome but are significantly reduced in functionally constrained regions, particularly within gene bodies and essential genes. This discovery fundamentally alters our understanding of evolutionary processes, suggesting that mutation is not a purely directionless force. "Mutation bias reflects natural selection in Arabidopsis thaliana" This opening statement encapsulates the core finding: mutation rates are not random but reflect epigenetic pressures. The authors demonstrate that mutations are less frequent in crucial genomic regions, directly contradicting the prevailing theory of random mutation. This observation suggests an active mechanism that minimizes deleterious mutations in essentia...
Read more