Product Description

"Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" was Haeckel's answer--the wrong one--to the most vexing question of nineteenth-century biology: what is the relationship between individual development (ontogeny) and the evolution of species and lineages (phylogeny)? In this, the first major book on the subject in fifty years, Stephen Gould documents the history of the idea of recapitulation from its first appearance among the pre-Socratics to its fall in the early twentieth century.

Mr. Gould explores recapitulation as an idea that intrigued politicians and theologians as well as scientists. He shows that Haeckel's hypothesis--that human fetuses with gill slits are, literally, tiny fish, exact replicas of their water-breathing ancestors--had an influence that extended beyond biology into education, criminology, psychoanalysis (Freud and Jung were devout recapitulationists), and racism. The theory of recapitulation, Gould argues, finally collapsed not from the weight of contrary data, but because the rise of Mendelian genetics rendered it untenable.

Turning to modern concepts, Gould demonstrates that, even though the whole subject of parallels between ontogeny and phylogeny fell into disrepute, it is still one of the great themes of evolutionary biology. Heterochrony--changes in developmental timing, producing parallels between ontogeny and phylogeny--is shown to be crucial to an understanding of gene regulation, the key to any rapprochement between molecular and evolutionary biology. Gould argues that the primary evolutionary value of heterochrony may lie in immediate ecological advantages for slow or rapid maturation, rather than in long-term changes of form, as all previous theories proclaimed.

Neoteny--the opposite of recapitulation--is shown to be the most important determinant of human evolution. We have evolved by retaining the juvenile characters of our ancestors and have achieved both behavioral flexibility and our characteristic morphology thereby (large brains by prolonged retention of rapid fetal growth rates, for example).

Gould concludes that there may be nothing new under the sun, but permutation of the old within complex systems can do wonders. As biologists, we deal directly with the kind of material complexity that confers an unbounded potential upon simple, continuous changes in underlying processes. This is the chief joy of our science."

[ ^Top ]

Used Ontogeny and Phylogeny        Rating:

The book purchased was a used copy of Stephen Gould's "Ontogeny and Phylogeny" in paperback. The book was no surprise since I knew what it was. Condition was as advertised, I think, but was excellent at any rate. Delivery was within a reasonable time. So this was a very satisfactory transaction from my point of view, excellent book for a reasonable price within a sensible time period. What else to expect?

One Of The Most Influential Books On Evolutionary Thought Published In The Past Twenty Five Years        Rating:

If there is any book that has greatly reinvigorated interest in the relationship of developmental biology to evolutionary biology, then Stephen Jay Gould's "Ontogeny and Phylogeny" may be the most likely suspect. When it was published originally back in the late 1970s, this elegantly written volume was as much a superb overview of Gould's extensive scientific research up to that time, having been preoccupied with understanding allometry and its evolutionary implications for years and writing a series of memorable scientific papers for which he would receive such notable honors as the Paleontological Society's Schuchert Award (which is bestowed upon paleobiologists under the age of forty for making significant contributions to the field.). It is one of the rare technical books on evolutionary thought which have become widely read by others outside of evolutionary biology, and that is due mainly for its relevance as an important history of developmental biology and philosophy of science text as well as a more technical volume of primary interest to developmental biologists, paleobiologists and other evolutionary biologists. Stephen Jay Gould explores the relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny with an elegant historical overview which starts with ancient Greek philosophers and emphasizes the work of Ernst Haeckel, Gavin de Beer and others. His scientific discussion about various aspects of ontogeny (e. g. neoteny) remains among the best written accounts I have come across. Now more than ever, "Ontogeny and Phylogeny" remains an important contribution to the history and philosophy of evolutionary thought in biology, especially in light of the current, substantial interest in "evo-devo", or rather, the importance of developmental biology in affecting not only our understanding of speciation, but equally important, in trying to comprehend better the patterns and processes of macroevolution. So I am not exaggerating when I observe that "Ontogeny and Phylogeny" remains one of the most influential books on evolutionary thought published in the last twenty five years; I predict that it will remain one of Gould's most important contributions to evolutionary biology, and an enduring legacy to a scientific career that became well known to fellow scientists and the general public alike.

The rise and fall of a scientific idea        Rating:

"Ontogeny recapitulates philogeny" is the largely defunct theory that as a fetus grows it reprises the collected earlier adult states of its evolutionary forebears.

And this book is not so much about that theory as it is about the history of how the theory was proposed, its influence on other learning and the process of its demise.

In this way, this book is properly bracketed with Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate in its discussion of the all too not empiracal process of empiracal reasoning. Its also reminiscent of Percival Lowell's assertion that canals existed on Mars because just as Lowell largely saw what he was predisposed to see early biologists like those mentioned in this work were themselves predisposed to see what they were predisposed to see.

Yes, the theory rose and fell but perhaps Gould's most telling discussion was in his treatment of how the theory came to misused for educational and political purposes. If the fetus recapitulated its evolutionary past, then perhaps children in prominent countries capitulated in their behavior the cultures of less prominent countries. And so, child's play was just a stage reminiscent of aboriginal social interaction and a child's make believe world was their real life religion.

Deep stuff.

What Gould could have added were the other abuses made on the still existent theory of Darwinian evolution wherein turn of the century aristocrats fancied themselves the socially fittest of the species. Again, we have an example of science placed at the easy service of prejudice.

However, and this is where Gould's discussion gives cause for hope, being a scientific theory it fell because it failed to pass muster with scientific techniques of testing.

And in this way, Gould's book is not so much about the passing of a scientific idea as it is about the use of the technique of empiracal testing and not predisposition to determine truth.

More of a history of ideas than a biology text        Rating:

This book is about the history of the concepts around which the "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" developed, flourished and eventually faded out. Gould goes into the viewpoint of every significant biological thinker that ever thought anything about this phrase, and what that thinker thought about all the other thinkers.
If you are really interested in the history of evolutionary thought, there is a point to reading this. But if you are just interested in reading about neat biological examples/life histories/concepts, this book is serious overkill.
It is probably not fair to rate this book for what it is not, instead of what it is. However, once I decided to read this book (and I read it twice, with several years between), I found that I didn't enjoy the reading that much. As Mark Twain remarked about some piece of music, the book is not as long as it seems. But it sure does seem long!

[ ^Top ]