Биологизаторство с точки зрения эволюционной биологии
Paradoxically the more we delve into intricacies of evolutionary mechanisms the more ways that biological determination of culture could be relaxed we see.
The commented famous work by S.J. Gould and R.C. Lewontin is crucial not only to sociobiology critique but to polemics on evolutionary theory in general. Reflection provoked by Gould and Lewontin’s paper in the field of philosophy of biology enables to clarify the relation between the adaptationist program and biological reductionism.
The article discusses the prospects of joint research of sociologists and socio-biologists on the evolution of morality and altruism. Sociologists compare morality and altruism in human society with that in animals behavior can be seen as manifestations of empathy and althruim and of co-existence rules in groups of animals of each biological species. The authors present the current understanding of the evolutionary prehistory of human social behavior. A significant challenge for cooperation activities of sociologists and sociobiologists is the rapid progress of the natural sciences. Discoveries and findings in biology and biologists models often lead to simplistic conclusions, and at the same time the works of sociologists, in which they try to use these innovations, often turns untenable. It is therefore necessary to continue the search for the directions and mechanisms of integration of sociological and sociobiological approaches to such complex phenomena as morality and altruism.
The article discusses general and specific problems of integration methods of the social and natural sciences, in particular sociobiology, evolutionary psychology and sociology methods in the study of emotions. The author argues that the emotion research, first of all moral emotions from the perspective of the evolutionary approach, can serve as a sort of "point", in which it is possible to combine methodological tools of sociology, sociobiology, evolutionary psychology and partly neuropsychophysiology to study complex social phenomena as morality and altruism, as well as various kinds of behavior associated with them. The paper discusses the theoretical and methodological aspects of the study of emotions in this way.
The validity of the Lophophorata as a monophyletic group remains controversial. New data on the innervation of the lophophore, which is a unique feature of the lophophorates, may help clarify the status of the Lophophorata and provide new information on the early evolution of the group. In this paper, the organization of the nervous system of the lophophore is described in adults of the minute phoronid Phoronis ovalis. The lophophore nervous system includes a dorsal ganglion, a tentacular nerve ring, an inner ganglion, an inner nerve ring, and six nerves in each tentacle. The inner ganglion and inner nerve ring, which is associated with sensory cells, are described for the first time in adult phoronids. The general plan of the nervous system of the lophophore and tentacles is similar in P. ovalis and bryozoans. These new results suggest the presence of two nerve centers and two nerve rings in the last common ancestor of phoronids and bryozoans. During evolution, bryozoans may have lost the outer nerve center and outer nerve ring, whereas phoronids may have lost the inner nerve center and inner nerve ring. These morphological results evidence the lophophorates are monophyletic.
In this paper the impact of adaptationism and genocentrism critique on the development of evolutionary theory in the past half century is examined. This critique was personified in R.C. Lewontin and S.J. Gould attack on sociobiology of E.O. Wilson and R. Dawkins. The conceptual reconstruction of the Modern Synthesis, undertaken by modern supporters of the “Expanded Synthesis” M. Pigliucci and G. Muller, can be reformulated in terms of adaptationism and genocentrism. Thus, adaptationism and genocentrism critique still guides the development of evolutionary theory in the 21st century