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:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Jo Reed

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Models of the Mind - Grace Lindsay *****

This is a remarkable book. When Ernest Rutherford made his infamous remark about science being either physics or stamp collecting, it was, of course, an exaggeration. Yet it was based on a point - biology in particular was primarily about collecting information on what happened rather than explaining at a fundamental level why it happened. This book shows how biologists, in collaboration with physicists, mathematicians and computer scientists, have moved on the science of the brain to model some of its underlying mechanisms. Grace Lindsay is careful to emphasise the very real difference between physical and biological problems. Most systems studied by physics are a lot simpler than biological systems, making it easier to make effective mathematical and computational models. But despite this, huge progress has been made drawing on tools and techniques developed for physics and computing to get a better picture of the mechanisms of the brain. In the book we see this from two directions

The Ten Equations that Rule the World - David Sumpter ****

David Sumpter makes it clear in this book that a couple of handfuls of equations have a huge influence on our everyday lives. I needed an equation too to give this book a star rating - I’ve never had one where there was such a divergence of feeling about it. I wanted to give it five stars for the exposition of the power and importance of these equations and just two stars for an aspect of the way that Sumpter did it. The fact that the outcome of applying my star balancing equation was four stars emphasises how good the content is. What we have here is ten key equations from applied mathematics. (Strictly, nine, as the tenth isn’t really an equation, it’s the programmer’s favourite ‘If… then…’ - though as a programmer I was always more an ‘If… then… else…’ fan.) Those equations range from the magnificent one behind Bayesian statistics and the predictive power of logistic regression to the method of determining confidence intervals and the kind of influencer matrix so beloved of social m

How to Read Numbers - Tom Chivers and David Chivers *****

This is one of my favourite kinds of book - it takes on the way statistics are presented to us, points out flaws and pitfalls, and gives clear guidance on how to do it better. The Chivers brothers' book isn't particularly new in doing this - for example, Michael Blastland and Andrew Dilnot did something similar in the excellent 2007 title The Tiger that Isn't - but it's good to have an up-to-date take on the subject, and How to Read Numbers gives us both some excellent new examples and highlights errors that are more common now. The relatively slim title (and that's a good thing) takes the reader through a whole host of things that can go wrong. So, for example, they explore the dangers of anecdotal evidence, tell of study samples that are too small or badly selected, explore the easily misunderstood meaning of 'statistical significance', consider confounders, effect size, absolute versus relative risk, rankings, cherry picking and more. This is all done i