Skip to main content

Darwin: Discovering the tree of life – Niles Eldredge ****

There have been a lot of books about Charles Darwin – some would say far too many. In fact, Darwin probably puts even Einstein in the shade in the way his life and work have been pulled to pieces, reassembled and made to mean pretty well anything the writer had in mind. Given this context, you have to be very brave (or foolish) to write a new Darwin book, and a very good writer to make it worth reading. Luckily for us, Niles Eldredge delivers a book that is both readable and enlightening with something new to say.
His style, though filled with scholarly authority, is very reader-friendly; this is a book you can enjoy reading, which is particularly surprising as it is to some extent tied in to an exhibition, usually the death knell for any readability in a book. Eldredge begins by giving us a thumbnail sketch of Darwin’s life, bringing in some interesting details and including poignant family photographs. He then expands on Darwin’s period of change from the creationist views he held as he departed on the Beagle to the evolutionary views that were already forming on his return five years later.
What is fascinating here is the way Eldredge analyzes the scientific process, itself in a state of evolution. During Darwin’s time there was a major change from the slightly naive approach espoused by Francis Bacon of induction from nature to the more modern approach of hypothesis, deduction from that hypothesis and test of the deductions against reality.
What enables Eldredge to get such a rich insight into the workings of Darwin’s mind is a detailed study of his notebooks, not always first hand by Eldredge, but taking as much as possible from the thoughts and ideas that Darwin captured in his many, straggling personal texts.
To traditionalist evolutionary biologists, Eldredge is something of a heretic, responsible with Steven J. Gould for the “punctuated equilibrium” theory that suggests that evolution is not a smooth process of constant change, but rather (at least in geological timescales) a process with long periods of very little change, interrupted by sudden, relatively quick developments. Although this book isn’t about this theory, he makes a very telling point how the reaction of many evolutionary biologists reflects the way geology moved from a catastrophist approach (assuming geological changes were typically like the biblical flood) to a gradual approach. Interestingly, modern geological thinking suggests things are less clear cut, more of a mix of the two with clear catastrophes happening, whether due to asteroid impact or hyper-volcanoes. It’s only a fervent support of faith in a theory over reasoning that results in the inability to consider the same possibility for evolution.
There is a section of the book that is perhaps too heavily dependent on analysis of notebooks for all but the determinedly bookish – you may wish to skim this – but later on Eldredge reverts to form and concludes with one of the best clarifications of why intelligent design isn’t a valid scientific hypothesis I’ve ever seen.
Eldredge does a good job all the way, never pushing his own theories too heavily. The book is glossy and a little on the big side (verging on being a coffee table volume in size), and perhaps could have been a little shorter – he does develop his arguments rather slowly, and a little repetitively – but overall it’s a welcome addition to Darwin literature, and well worth a look from anyone who wants to get beneath the traditional hagiography.
Hardback:  
Review by Jo Reed

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Great Silence – Milan Cirkovic ****

The great 20th century physicist Enrico Fermi didn’t say a lot about extraterrestrial life, but his one utterance on the subject has gone down in legend. He said ‘Where is everybody?’ Given the enormous size and age of the universe, and the basic Copernican principle that there’s nothing special about planet Earth, space should be teeming with aliens. Yet we see no evidence of them. That, in a nutshell, is Fermi’s paradox.

Not everyone agrees that Fermi’s paradox is a paradox. To some people, it’s far from obvious that ‘space should be teeming with aliens’, while UFO believers would scoff at the suggestion that ‘we see no evidence of them’. Even people who accept that both statements are true – including  a lot of professional scientists – don’t always lose sleep over Fermi’s paradox. That’s something that makes Milan Cirkovic see red, because he takes it very seriously indeed. In his own words, ‘it is the most complex multidisciplinary problem in contemporary science’.

He points out th…

The Order of Time - Carlo Rovelli ***

There's good news and bad news. The good news is that The Order of Time does what A Brief History of Timeseemed to promise but didn't cover: it attempts to explore what time itself is. The bad news is that Carlo Rovelli does this in such a flowery and hand-waving fashion that, though the reader may get a brief feeling that they understand what he's writing about, any understanding rapidly disappears like the scent of a passing flower (the style is catching).

It doesn't help either that the book is in translation so some scientific terms are mangled, or that Rovelli has a habit of self-contradiction. Time and again (pun intended) he tells us time doesn't exist, then makes use of it. For example, at one point within a page of telling us of time's absence Rovelli writes of events that have duration and a 'when' - both meaningless terms without time. At one point he speaks of a world without time, elsewhere he says 'Time and space are real phenomena.'…

The Happy Brain - Dean Burnett ****

This book was sitting on my desk for some time, and every time I saw it, I read the title as 'The Happy Brian'. The pleasure this gave me was one aspect of the science of happiness that Dean Burnett does not cover in this engaging book.

Burnett's writing style is breezy and sometimes (particularly in footnotes) verging on the whimsical. His approach works best in the parts of the narrative where he is interviewing everyone from Charlotte Church to a stand-up comedian and various professors on aspects of happiness. We get to see the relevance of home and familiarity, other people, love (and sex), humour and more, always tying the observations back to the brain.

In a way, Burnett sets himself up to fail, pointing out fairly early on that everything is far too complex in the brain to really pin down the causes of something as diffuse as happiness. He starts off with the idea of cheekily trying to get time on an MRI scanner to study what his own brain does when he's happy, b…