BIG03.POSTMODERN SYNTHESIS

BIG03.POSTMODERN SYNTHESIS

“We're beginning to see the coalescence of a new and quite different theory from that that represented the strict Darwinism of the so-called modern synthesis. A new and different theory with a Darwinian core is being forged, exciting and fruitful theory in the very best sense that first of all it is quite different in many important respects from what was the standard take.” – Stephen Jay Gould

How does nature and evolution work in 2017?

BIG outline: While culture (and mind in relative concert) is about our developing second nature, our other nature, this BIG is about Mother Nature, the evolutionary process and how we express that through our range of knowledge(s) in 2017 and beyond. Darwin used ‘natural selection’ as a metaphor for ‘man’s methodical selection’ in culture. Nature’s “selection” is not conscious, and doesn’t have the foresight of human selection and Darwin was clear in stating and restating that natural selection was the main, but not the exclusive means of modification. I’ll refer to this as ‘classical Darwinism’. However, over the 1930/40s, the ‘modern synthesis’ emerged as a neo-Darwinian fusion of Darwin’s theory of evolution and Mendelian genetics. Since this time evolution has become more hard, more genetic to the point where genes as crucial process in evolution are referred to as the purpose of evolution. The Postmodern Synthesis is a rejection of this narrowing of evolutionary theory. Instead, the Postmodern Synthesis expands classical Darwinism out towards a general theory of nature. In working through what culture is, a lot of that is working through what it is not and that means getting to grips with evolutionary theory and what is happening in nature. The Postmodern Synthesis uses the explanatory power of the trilectic mechanism previously discussed, and aligns it with Richard Lewontin’s triple helix, Edward O. Wilson’s sociobiology, classical Darwinism and the inclusion of other means of modification and process in evolution (such as epigenetics), towards a general theory of nature that we can see in the earth systems science approach in James Lovelock’s Gaia approach.

BIG outcome: We’re doing BIG knowledge here and illuminating how culture and society work. When you’re watching television or listening to radio and a commentator refers to a team, political party, etc as having something “in their DNA” when it is in their culture, or psychology, that is wrong and we need to understand the developments that foster such convenient ignorance. This comes from an incomplete reading of nature, and transferring that shortcoming back onto culture. From the modern synthesis the genetic basis of behaviour  became an increasing focus and from this cultural/historical bandwagon Sociobiology (1975), Cultural Ethology (1975) and Memetics (1976 ‘The Selfish Gene’) emerged. Evolutionary Psychology (1992) is one of several more recent expansions of this idea.

When we say that something is natural we need to be really, really (really) clear what we mean by nature. Is nature a model of sustainability and diversity borne of geological time with intermittent and varying evolutionary processes and forces, or is nature an arena for neo-Darwinian genetic selection to operate? Are there a range of ‘actions’ within the evolutionary process, with natural selection being the main, but not exclusive, as classical Darwinism states? How important are discoveries/contributions like epigenetics, systems biology, etc in refining our understanding of the evolutionary process, and nature more generally? The Postmodern Synthesis is a social science based response to evolutionary theory towards a general theory of nature. In BIG.08 we’re going to look at Social Capitalism and the importance of efficiency and ‘what is nature?’ is fundamental to that. Furthermore, in BIG11.Easter Planet we foster a ‘nature’s-eye view’ to the planet and a Postmodern Synthesis is important on its own, and in its contribution to these other BIGs.