China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Animal Biodiversity
Published in Malcolm S. Gordon, Reinhard Blickhan, John O. Dabiri, John J. Videler, Animal Locomotion, 2017
The earliest stages of alpha taxonomy were based primarily upon gross external morphology and various internal anatomical features of adult animals belonging to contemporary groups (note that many species that were common in the fifteenth or sixteenth centuries, also some much more recently, have since gone extinct). Early biologists also recognized that there are often similarities between the sequences of events that occur during embryonic development and growth of particular kinds of animals and the inferred evolutionary histories of those animals. These observations led to the development of a theoretical statement (demonstrably correct only in broad outline): “Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.” A substantial part of modern evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo) focuses on these aspects (Hall and Olson 2006; Gilbert and Epel 2009; Tollefsbol 2014; Bustin and Misteli 2016).
The many histories of the conflict thesis: the science vs. religion narrative in nineteenth-century Germany
Published in Annals of Science, 2023
Christoffer Leber, Claus Spenninger
In Haeckel's absence, Virchow rejected his colleague's reform ideas arguing that scientists should be more careful when presenting unproven theories as given facts. Virchow differentiated between certain, scientifically proven knowledge and unproven theories, to which he counted the evolution theory, Haeckel's biogenetic law, and his theory of animated cells, so-called ‘plastidules’. Haeckel's biogenetic law, formulated in 1866, claimed that the stages an animal embryo undergoes during development (ontogeny) replicate the evolutionary steps of its species (phylogeny).85 Virchow demanded moderation from scientists and warned his colleagues against misusing scientific theories for political or ideological purposes.86 In the long run, he believed, teaching Darwinism at schools would become a serious threat to the moral and political order of the newly founded German Empire, given that it supported anti-Christian, even socialist ideas. ‘Just imagine how the theory of evolution already appears in the head of a socialist today!’87 The young and impressionable would eventually fall into the clutches of socialism and materialism, he feared. Virchow went further and reminded his audience of the collective trauma brought by the Paris Commune, the short intermezzo of the revolutionary city council in Paris after the Franco-Prussian War of 1871: ‘Yes, gentlemen, this may seem ridiculous to some of you, but it is very serious, and I hope that the theory of descent will not bring us all the horrors that similar theories have already caused in our neighbouring country. After all, also this theory, if you take it seriously, has a very questionable side, and you hopefully have not missed that socialism has got in touch with it.’88 Virchow therefore insisted: ‘We must remind the school teachers: do not teach it!’89 He concluded his lecture with an appeal to moderation: scientists should limit themselves to what they certainly know and to what they can prove, especially when their theories have unforeseeable consequences for society and its morals. ‘We cannot teach, we cannot call it an achievement of science that man has descended from the ape or any other animal’, he concluded his lecture.90 Virchow's horror scenario of a new Paris Commune shows how much liberal elites saw socialism as a threat to their political and cultural hegemony. He knew that in large parts of the German bourgeoisie the Paris Commune triggered fears of a ‘socialist revolution’.91