1. In Wonderful Life Gould hypothesizes on cultural values, assumptions, and what kind of logic are evident in the original interpretation of the Burgess Shale, and then the change in thinking that led to its recent re-interpretation. What model of biodiversity and evolutionary change does Gould argue resulted in the earlier error in classifying the Burgess Shale animals? What is the original cultural/historical source of that model, or what he calls “iconography”?
Iconography comes from AO Lovejoy's The Great Chain of Living. The error Gould refers to is how evolution has been present and taught up until recently of evolution being a process of A came from B and then A died out and was replaced by B until C came out of B and then replaced B.... and so on. Instead he says we should view evolution as something that has many changes happening between A, B and C at the same time and A, B and C may never become completely extinct at any given time, like traditional evolution may present.
2. Notice that much of Gould’s argument centers on discussing evolutionary tress (phylogenies) of the kind you constructed on a small scale. At the end of the chapter we see he is interested in the overall shapes (“topology”) of the phylogenies. Why? What does he claim that the shape of phylogenies imply about how evolution happens over long stretches of time that had been neglected by biologists? What kinds of causal factors alter the course of evolution, the shape of phylogenies, and the eventual designs of organisms that we see today?
He presents his argument in a way that is trying to show how complex evolution really is... no matter what place in time you look at it. I think, at least for me, it was really easy to think that some bacteria grew into some small organisms and that grew into a fish, which grew into and bird, which grew into.... well you get the point... and here I am today!! It really gives evolution a negative and unbelievable view when presented in that way. I think he uses it because it clearly shows how finding a beginning and an end is hard and not a simple request. It also shows how we evolve to meet the requirements of our environment!
I feel like people, me included, look to science as a way to find hard facts and answers, and the moment science isn't clear, it looses legitimacy. I hope this makes sense.. just trying to be honest!! These concepts are difficult for me to grasp!
2B. Related: What does it mean to “replay the Tape of Life” and why is this an interesting idea to Gould? Relate Gould’s preferred model with the views of early Catastrophists – what would Cuvier (if alive) like and not like about Gould’s interpretation?
I think when Gould talks about replaying the Tape of Life he means a retelling of how evolutionary history was told. He talks about two ways museums display natural history evolution .... in the way of temporal and the way of dumbest to smartest on a moral scale. He sees problems with these and thinks that if we were to retell/replay the way we thought about the creatures around us, like in the Evolution of the Vertebrates by Colbert. Colbert spends times talking about the interactions and relationships of the species in one place in time before he goes on to talk about evolution. I believe and I think Cuvier would agree with Gould that this way of "replaying the Tape of Life" would have created a culture where the science of evolution is more believed, less skeptical and overall better understood. This will also, I think, result in a society that is more conscious of their surroundings and respectful to those who they live amongst. At the same time, I am not sure that what Cuvier may have thought about this discussion is even relevant. After doing research, I can make an assumption that Cuvier would have agreed with evolution presented in a "replay" because he didn't agree with the evolution theory of his time.
3. What is “disparity” versus “diversity”? Give an original example (one not given in the reading).
disparity - little (variation) Humans are a great example of this... we are mostly all the same just a small percentage of genes here and there that make us look different
diversity - a lot (variation) Cats! MEOW
4. In the reading Evolution by Walking what is so interesting about how the American Museum of Natural History has changed their mammal display? Why is it significant in how we think about biodiversity in his opinion?
Their animal display is a tree-like structure in a cladogram. It shows how shared traits create a group to look at and look at the relationships between species... not looking at evolutions as straight line anymore.
ReplyDeleteOverall, good responses, but please read a little more carefully - in the first sentence you write: "Iconography comes from AO Lovejoy's The Great Chain of Living.." The iconography comes from Aristotle and the Judeo-Christian tradition that built from it, Lovejoy simply chronicled this fact in his book. The book was called the Great Chain of BEING, not Living....
Also you should re-read the section on what "replaying the Tape of Life"means to Gould, you don't quite have the concept right. Likewise, I would review the differences between "disparity" and "diversity"!
If you want to update your answers in the comment line, that would be great.
best,
ay