[asa] The word "evolution"

I just noticed that one of the feature articles in the current May 2008 issue of Physics Today is titled "The evolution of a dedicated synchrotron light source." That spurred me to finally comment on the seemingly endless fray on this list about the proper use of the word "evolution."

I'd like to cast my vote for a rather broad usage of the word. I suppose this would be at the other end of the spectrum from the more narrow usage that Greg recommends. Much of my thinking was influenced by recently listening to a course on the history of the theory of evolution by Ed Larsen. He spent a fair amount of time discussing concepts of evolution prior to Darwin. If I understood him correctly, evolution was a broad term used to express the idea that an entity was derived from a previous and similar, though different, form. In contrast, alternative views were that of stasis, or eternal existence of that entity, and catastrophism, or sudden appearance of that entity independent from any pre-existing forms.

The concept of evolution was independent of any source of variation or of any mechanism of selection and seemed to be broader than organic life. Hence, it seems to me quite appropriate to use the term "evolution" for any state that develops from a prior state through some type of change, whether it be human-mediated or according to natural law, or anything else.

It seems appropriate to refer, as the editors of Physics Today do, to technological successes as having evolved. I'm particularly interested in the sociology of scientific research and of technology development. (and I do agree with Greg that we need much more emphasis on social sciences in the ASA) I've closely observed two separate DRAM development teams in IBM and have seen how each of them evolved along slightly different paths. Their "group knowledge" seems to exist independent of any particular individual. It was a major challenge to document that group knowledge and to transfer that knowledge to a different group.

In general, the use of the term "evolution" is easily understood from the context as in the title quoted above. When used as a stand-alone term, as in a pollster's rendering of "Do you believe in evolution?", the meaning is not as clear but given the culture wars around us, virtually everyone understands it to mean "the development of all living species from a common ancestor" with primary mechanisms for change being any modification of genetics and selection being primarily, though not exclusively, natural selection. What confuses the issue is the oft-appended assumption "without purpose and without any divine guidance." This does not seem to be an appropriate use of the term but is so common that this must be clarified for many people.

Randy

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon May 26 17:59:55 2008