Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T16:42:08.144Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Biodiversity, Darwin, and the Fossil Record

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 June 2009

By
Kim Cuddington  and
Michael Ruse
Edited by
Markku Oksanen  and
Juhani Pietarinen
Kim Cuddington
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor Ohio University in the Department of Biological Sciences and Quantitative Biology Institute
Michael Ruse
Affiliation:
Professor of Philosophy Florida State University; Fellow of the Royal Society Canada
Markku Oksanen
Affiliation:
University of Kuopio, Finland
Juhani Pietarinen
Affiliation:
University of Turku, Finland
Get access

Summary

Some ideas about nature owe more to our historical beliefs than to current theories or data. Because nature has been seen as an expression of the mind of the divine, it is particularly prone to be interpreted in light of prior beliefs. As it was once a heresy to suggest that the earth circles the sun, so in many quarters it is still taboo to suggest that the natural state of our global ecosystem is not one of stability. We will argue that this belief is something rooted more in our religious past than in our scientific present. Adopting a common usage of the term “biodiversity” to mean the total number of species in an area, we address Darwin's ideas on biodiversity and the claims of modern interpreters of the fossil record. We claim that these ideas are influenced by older prescientific concepts regarding the bounty and balance of nature.

Darwin firmly rejected the idea that the existence of particular identities of species was fixed. He claimed that species went extinct and others came into being. Yet, Darwin and modern authors have interpreted the fossil record as supporting the hypothesis that the total number of species will reach an equilibrium value. We shall demonstrate that the basis of this claim, and a similar claim presented by modern authors, is weak. This emphasis on equilibrium interpretations may be due to an idea prevalent in the seventeenth century regarding the state of nature.

Type
Chapter
Information
Philosophy and Biodiversity , pp. 101 - 118
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alroy, J. 1999. Equilibrial Diversity Dynamics in North American Mammals. In Biodiversity Dynamics: Turnover of Populations, Taxa and Communities, M. L. McKinney and J. Drake, eds. New York: Columbia University Press
Benton, M. J. 1987. Progress and Competition in Macroevolution. Biological Reviews 62:305–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benton, M. J. 1995. Diversification and Extinction in the History of Life. Science 268:52–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benton, M. J. 1997. Models for the Diversification of Life. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 12:490–5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benton, M. J. 1999. The History of Life: Large Databases in Palaeontology. In Numerical Paleobiology: Computer-based Modelling and Analysis of Fossils and Their Distributions, D. A. T. Harper, ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons
Carr, T. and Kitchell., J. 1980. Dynamics of Taxonomic Diversity. Paleobiology 6:427–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cracraft, J. 1985. Biological Diversification and Its Causes. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 72:794–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuddington, K. 2001. The ‘Balance of Nature’ Metaphor and Equilibrium in Population Ecology. Biology and Philosophy 16:437–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. 1859. The Origin of Species. 1st ed. London: John Murray
Darwin, C. 1872. The Origin of Species. 6th ed. New York: Mentor
Egerton, F. N. 1973. Changing Concepts of Balance of Nature. Quarterly Review of Biology 48:322–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gale, B. 1972. Darwin and the Concept of a Struggle for Existence: A Study in the Extrascientific Origins of Scientific Ideas. Isis 63:321–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghiselin, M. 1995. Perspective: Darwin, Progress and Economic Principles. Evolution 49:1029–37CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoffman, A. 1985. Biotic Diversification in the Phanerozoic: Diversity Independence. Palaeontology 28:387–91Google Scholar
Ives, A. 1995. Measuring Resilience in Stochastic Systems. Ecological Monographs 65:217–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingsland, S. E. 1985. Modelling Nature: Episodes in the History of Population Ecology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Kitchell, J. A. and T. R. Carr. 1985. Nonequilibrium Model of Diversification: Faunal Turnover Dynamics. In Phanerozoic Diversity Patterns, J. W. Valentine, ed. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press
Miller, A. and Sepkoski, J. J.. 1988. Modeling Bivalve Diversification: The Effect of Interaction on a Macroevoutionary System. Paleobiology 14:364–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rieppel, O. 1984. The Problem of Extinction. Zeitschrift fur Zoologischer Systematik und Evolutionsforschung 22:81–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenzweig, M. L. 1995. Species Diversity in Space and Time. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1978. A Kinetic Model of Phanerozoic Taxonomic Diversity Ⅰ. Analysis of Marine Orders. Paleobiology 4:223–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1979. A Kinetic Model of Phanerozoic Taxonomic Diversity Ⅱ. Early Phanerozoic Families and Multiple Equilibria. Paleobiology 5:222–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1984. A Kinetic Model of Phanerozoic Taxonomic Diversity Ⅲ. Post-paleozoic Families and Mass Extinctions. Paleobiology 10:246–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1992. A Compendium of Fossil Marine Animal Families. 2d ed. Milwaukee Public Museum, Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Contributions in Biology and Geology, no. 83
Sepkoski, J. J., Jr. 1996. Competition in Macroevolution: The Double Wedge Revisited. In Evolutionary Paleobiology, D. Jablonski, D. H. Erwin, and J. H. Lipps, eds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Walker, T. and Valentine., J. 1984. Equilibrium Models of Evolutionary Species Diversity and the Number of Empty Niches. American Naturalist 124:887–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×