Re: Darwin and Lamarck

Chris Lees (chrislees@easynet.co.uk)
Sat, 24 Apr 1999 17:40:43 +0100

Date: Sat, 24 Apr 1999 17:40:43 +0100
From: Chris Lees <chrislees@easynet.co.uk>
To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Darwin and Lamarck

Mario wrote in part :

> > <snip>
> > > (By the way: Darwin was a Lamarckist, in the sense that he believed in the
> > > inheritance of acquired characteristics!!! From recent findings in biology, it
> > > appears to me that he was more right than the neodarwinians and therefore
> > > Jablonka & Lambs ideas should be read with interest.)
> >
> > But this has been established for at least a decade, if not two, has it
> > not,
> > Mario ?
>
> Right, but why then took it me so long to discover? How many biologists and
> philosophers are truly aware of this? Why do we keep referring to the idea of
> inheritance of acquired characteristics as Lamarckism? Seems to me that this
> knowledge is somehow suppressed.

"Epigenesis,......,in fact quite ancient in biology, has been
underappreciated in the recent past for ideological reasons
(specifically,
anti-'vitalist' phobias), but it continues to be an indispensable
notion"

from

Anderson, Myrdene (1990); Biology and semiotics; Semiotics in the
Individual
Sciences; VOL. 1 (ed. W. A. Koch), Universittsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer.

Chris.
http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~chrislees/tao.index.html

===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit