HOLISTIC BIOLOGY: WHAT IT IS AND WHY IT MATTERS

Recent developments toward a more holistic biology do not eliminate reductionism and determinism, but they do suggest more complex forms of them, in which there are multiple, interacting influences, as there are in complex or chaotic systems. Though there is a place in biology for both systemic and atomistic modes of explanation, for those with a theological perspective the shift to complex explanations in biology is often welcome. It suggests a more subtle view of divine action in which God's purposes are affected through engagement with the complex systems of creation rather than by discrete interventions. It also invites us to connect the biological interdependence with the interdependence in the nature and purposes of God, and it is consonant with a mystical vision of the unity of all things.     

EVOLUTION AND THEODICY: HOW (NOT) TO DO SCIENCE AND THEOLOGY

This article uses Christopher Southgate's work and engagement with other scholars on the topic of evolutionary theodicy as a case study in the dialogue of science and Christian theology. A typology is outlined of ways in which the voices of science and the Christian tradition may be related in a science–theology dialogue, and examples of each position on the typology are given from the literature on evolution and natural evil. The main focus is on Southgate's evolutionary theodicy and the alternative proposal by Neil Messer. By bringing these two accounts into dialogue, some key methodological issues are brought into focus, enabling some conclusions to be drawn about the range and limits of fruitful methodological possibilities for dialogues between science and Christian theology.     

NATURAL SELECTION AND THE PROBLEM OF EVIL: AN EVOLUTIONARY MODEL WITH APPLICATION TO AN ANCIENT DEBATE

Abstract. Since Darwin, scholars have contemplated what our growing understanding of natural selection, combined with the fact that great suffering occurs, allows us to infer about the possibility that a benevolent God created the universe. Building on this long line of thought, I develop a model that illustrates how undesirable characteristics of the world (stylized “evils”) can influence long‐run outcomes. More specifically, the model considers an evolutionary process in which each generation faces a risk from a “natural evil” (e.g., predation, disease, or a natural disaster) subsequent to a basic resource allocation game. This allows both resource allocation and the natural evil to influence the number of surviving offspring. As the model shows, when the risk from the natural evil can be mitigated through the benevolent behavior of neighbors, the population may have increasing benevolence as a result of (1) greater risk from the natural evil and (2) a greater degree to which selfish individuals transfer resources to themselves in the resource allocation game. The main implication is that a world with evolutionary processes (in contrast to a world of static design) can allow two factors that have traditionally been considered “evils”—namely, the indiscriminate cruelty of the natural world and the capacity for humans to harm each other—to promote desirable long‐run outcomes.     

RELIGION AND RELIGIOUS BELIEFS AS EVOLUTIONARY ADAPTATIONS

Scholars employing an evolutionary approach to the study of religion and religious beliefs search for ultimate explanations of the origin, propagation, and persistence of religious beliefs. This quest often pairs in debate two opposing perspectives: the adaptationist and “by‐product” explanations of religion and religious beliefs. The majority of scholars prefer the by‐product approach, which is agnostic and even doubtful of the usefulness of religious beliefs. Despite this pervasive negativity, it seems unwarranted to deny the great usefulness of religious beliefs—particularly concerning their past utility. Instead, adaptationist explanations of religion and religious beliefs must be re‐established as interesting and useful approaches to the study of religious beliefs.     

REFLECTIONS ON BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS AND EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY: A SELECTIVE REVIEW OF EVOLUTION SINCE DARWIN—THE FIRST 150 YEARS. EDITED BY M. A. BELL,D. J. FUTUYAMA,W. F. EANES, & J. S. LEVINTON

This review focuses on parallels between the selectionist sciences of evolutionary biology and behavior analysis. In selectionism, complex phenomena are interpreted as the cumulative products of relatively simple processes acting over time—natural selection in evolutionary biology and reinforcement in behavior analysis. Because evolutionary biology is the more mature science, an examination of the factors that led to the triumph of natural selection provides clues whereby reinforcement may achieve a similar fate in the science of behavior.     

OUTSTANDING ISSUES WITH ROBERT RUSSELL'S NIODA CONCERNING QUANTUM BIOLOGY AND THEISTIC EVOLUTION

Non‐Interventionist Objective Divine Action (NIODA), introduced by Robert John Russell, is a model of divine action drawing upon insights from quantum mechanics. It presents an intriguing and significant challenge to classical conceptions of divine action with far‐reaching consequences. When applying NIODA to theistic evolution, however, significant questions emerge that require attention. We identify and assess two sets of concerns. The first relates to quantum physics, particularly whether and how quantum occurrences influence mutations and evolution. We argue that the current empirical evidence is ambiguous in its support of the kinds of quantum action that Russell proposes, though emerging data from quantum biology look promising. The second set of concerns is metaphysical, especially concerning the problem of evil. NIODA gives Godextensive agency over evolution and genetics, which has adverse consequences for theodicy. We propose potential solutions to the problems highlighted in our article, both metaphysical and physical, to improve the viability of NIODA's application to theistic evolution.     

SPECIES,TEPEES, SCOTTIES,AND JOCKEYS: SELECTED BY CONSEQUENCES

“Ideas are like species: they must evolve.” This claim forms the conceptual core of an engaging book by Jonnie Hughes (2011), On the Origin of Tepees. Hughes asks: If evolution by natural selection explains the origin of the human species, then does selection by consequences also explain the origin of what we humans make and do? This question prompts consideration of three important analogies: between natural selection and artificial selection, between the law of natural selection and the law of effect, and between biological evolution and cultural evolution. These analogies in turn stimulate examination of the notions of purpose, design, and agency. Finally, discussion moves to the selectionism of Darwin and Skinner; although still controversial, this view remains the best way for natural science to understand the origins of adaptive behavior.     

The Emergence of Sex

Biological traits, the foci of natural selection, are by definition emergent from the genes, proteins, and other “nothing-buts” that constitute them. Moreover, and with the exception of recently emergent “spandrels,” each can be accorded a teleological dimension—each is “for” some purpose conducive to an organism's continuation. Sex, which is “for” the generation of recombinant genomes, may be one of the most ancient and ubiquitous traits in biology. In the course of its evolution, many additional traits, such as gender and nurture, have emerged. Patterns of sexual exchange are the basis for patterns of biological evolution and are central to the process of eukaryotic speciation. Human sexuality is central to our selves.     

DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY,NATURAL SELECTION,AND THE CONCEPTUAL BOUNDARIES OF THE MODERN EVOLUTIONARY SYNTHESIS

Using the evolution of the stickleback family of subarctic fish as a touchstone, we explore the effect of new discoveries about regulatory genetics, developmental plasticity, and epigenetic inheritance on the conceptual foundations of the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis. Identifying the creativity of natural selection as the hallmark of the Modern Synthesis, we show that since its inception its adherents have pursued a variety of research projects that at first seemed to conflict with its principles, but were accommodated. We situate challenges coming from developmental biology in a dialectic between innovation and tradition, suggesting on the basis of past episodes that even if developmental plasticity and epigenetic inheritance are aligned with its principles the Modern Synthesis (and its image in the public reception of evolution) will be significantly affected.     

PROCESS ECOLOGY: STEPPING STONES TO BIOSEMIOSIS

Many in science are disposed not to take biosemiotics seriously, dismissing it as too anthropomorphic. Furthermore, biosemiotic apologetics are cast in top‐down fashion, thereby adding to widespread skepticism. An effective response might be to approach biosemiotics from the bottom up, but the foundational assumptions that support Enlightenment science make that avenue impossible. Considerations from ecosystem studies reveal, however, that those conventional assumptions, although once possessing great utilitarian value, have come to impede deeper understanding of living systems because they implicitly depict the evolution of the universe backward. Ecological dynamics suggests instead a smaller set of countervailing postulates that allows evolution to play forward and sets the stage for tripartite causalities, signs, and interpreters—the key elements of biosemiosis—to emerge naturally out of the interaction of chance with configurations of autocatalytic processes. Biosemiosis thereby appears as a fully legitimate outgrowth of the new metaphysic and shows promise for becoming the supervenient focus of a deeper perspective on the phenomenon of life.     

语言——自然选择的一种适应

该文认为人类的语言能力是一种生物学意义上的适应,是自然选择的产物。人类的语言与自然界中其它复杂的生物学适应相类似,也具有特定的机能。语言的特定机能在于编码叙事性信息并与他人分享,这与人类认知活动中因果推理所具有的高度社会性特点相一致。两个新的研究领域,进化博弈理论和分子进化选择理论,都证实了语言是一种受到自然选择的进化适应     

Introducing Science to the Psychology of the Soul: Experimental Existential Psychology

ABSTRACT— Humans live out their lives knowing that their own death is inevitable; that their most cherished beliefs and values, and even their own identities, are uncertain; that they face a bewildering array of choices; and that their private subjective experiences can never be shared with another human being. This knowledge creates five major existential concerns: death, isolation, identity, freedom, and meaning. The role of these concerns in human affairs has traditionally been the purview of philosophy. However, recent methodological and conceptual advances have led to the emergence of an experimental existential psychology directed toward empirically investigating the roles that these concerns play in psychological functioning. This new domain of psychological science has revealed the pervasive influence of deep existential concerns on diverse aspects of human thought and behavior.     

SYSTEMS BIOLOGY AND PREDICTIVE NEUROSCIENCE: A DOUBLE HELICAL APPROACH

This article explores the overlap between systems biology and predictive neuroscience, placing them in their larger context, the contemporary trend of bioinformatic convergence across the sciences. These two domains overlap with respect to their interest in data accumulation and data integration; their reliance on computational statistical correlation; and their translational goals, that is, producing practical fruits and applications from the interscientific cross‐pollination that contemporary data‐integrative approaches make possible. The interventions that such translational conversations generate are medical and social in nature, and are aimed at both prevention (through prediction) and treatment. It will be argued that such approaches, socially and medically applied, contain potential for conveying both agency‐enhancing and agency‐diminishing social messages. The article concludes with a call to balance the overwhelmingly quantitative focus characteristic of predictive neuroscience with more qualitative empirical methodologies. This would represent a double helical approach.     

WHAT IT TAKES TO LIVE PHILOSOPHICALLY: OR,HOW TO PROGRESS IN THE ART OF LIVING

This essay presents an account of what it takes to live a philosophical way of life: practitioners must be committed to a worldview, structure their lives around it, and engage in truth-directed practices. Contra John Cooper, it does not require that one’s life be solely guided by reason. Religious or tradition-based ways of life count as truth directed as long as their practices are reasons responsive and would be truth directed if the claims made by their way of life are correct. The essay argues that these three conditions can be met by progressors as well as sages. Making progress in how one acts in the world, and improving one’s understanding and direction through being part of a community is living a philosophical way of life. The offered view acknowledges more ways to develop the art of living and enables a broader range of people to count as living philosophically.     

COLLECTIVE SELF‐ORGANIZATION IN GENERAL BIOLOGY: GILLES DELEUZE,CHARLES S. PEIRCE,AND STUART KAUFFMAN

Stuart Kauffman's proposal in Investigations to ground a “general biology” in the laws of self‐organization governing systems of autonomous agents runs up against the methodological problem of how to integrate formal mathematical with semantic and semiotic approaches to the study of evolutionary development. Gilles Deleuze's concept of the virtual and C. S. Peirce's system of existential graphs provide a theoretical framework and practical art for answering this problem of method by modeling the creative event of collective self‐organization as both represented and practiced in the scientific community.     

On The Reality of Tooth Fairies: A Review of The God Delusion

In The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins reviews the evidence for and against God. After considering arguments for a divine power, he says the main current one is that the characteristics of living creatures must be attributed to an all-powerful designer. Design is the only plausible account, because the excellent fit between each plant and animal and its environment could not possibly have appeared in one stroke by pure chance. Dawkins agrees that randomness could not have done the job, but he says that a designer is equally unlikely. The only viable explanation is evolution by natural selection, a process that operates without plan or design. He then turns to the adaptive value of religious belief. After failing to find any, he proposes that belief in divinities is the by-product of a powerful tendency to learn from others, an adaptive strategy produced by natural selection. Adults and other influential figures teach children many useful things, but they also train them to worship deities. Religious devotion is established through education, and it is maintained over generations by the social learning processes underlying all instances of cultural evolution. Dawkins'' arguments together with other problems encountered in describing evolutionary processes highlight the importance of social learning. His discussion leads the reviewer to assert that only by knowing the mechanisms of social learning is it possible to understand how biological and cultural evolution interact to produce life as we find it.     

Evolutionary Psychology: The Wheat and the Chaff

Evolutionary approaches are on the rise in the social sciences and have the potential to bring an all–encompassing conceptual framework to the study of human behavior. Together with neuroscience, which is digging the grave of mind–body dualism, evolutionary psychology is bound to undermine the still reigning human–animal dualism. If a Darwinian reshaping of the social sciences seems inevitable, even desirable, this should not be looked at as a hostile takeover. The underlying theme of this essay is that it is time for psychologists to join the Darwinian revolution, yet the essay also critically reviews current evolutionary psychology. It questions the loose application of adaptationist thinking and the fragmentation of the genome, behavior, and the brain. From biology we learn that not every species–typical trait is necessarily advantageous, and from neuroscience we learn that not every psychological ability or tendency necessarily needs to have its own specialized brain circuitry. But even if the concept of adaptation is hard to apply, psychologists would do well to start looking at human behavior in the light of evolution.     

古尔德——道金斯之争的核心问题

斯蒂芬·杰伊·古尔德和理查德·道金斯是著名的进化生物学家和颇有影响的媒体科学家,他们在进化论的很多方面都有不同意见。“进化是进步的吗?”是古尔德和道金斯之争的核心问题。在追溯这一问题的历史的基础之上,考察古尔德和道金斯观点的分歧以及探讨这种分歧背后的可能原因。     

QUANTUM ASPECTS OF LIFE: RELATING EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY WITH THEOLOGY VIA MODERN PHYSICS

Abstract In the present paper, I shall argue that quantum theory can contribute to reconciling evolutionary biology with the creation hypothesis. After giving a careful definition of the theological problem, I will, in a first step, formulate necessary conditions for the compatibility of evolutionary theory and the creation hypothesis. In a second step, I will show how quantum theory can contribute to fulfilling these conditions. More precisely, I claim that (1) quantum probabilities are best understood in terms of ontological indeterminism, but (2) reflect nevertheless causal openness rather than divine indifference or arbitrariness, and (3) such a genuinely creative universe can be considered as the work of a loving Creator. I ask subsequently whether these necessary conditions are also sufficient for the compatibility of evolutionary theory and the creation hypothesis. Finally, I will show that relating evolutionary biology with theology via quantum theory could also shed some light on the nature of life.