Idealistic morphology

Before 2nd WW German idealistic morphology had many prominent proponents. Nowadays the concept of idealistic morphology is obviously a forgotten theory of biological evolution. Neverthenless its basic concept of directed evolution live poorly on the verge of the scientific interest (John Davison PEH).The basic concept of IM is that there are idealistic, non-darwinian forces behind the evolutionary process - "Zeitgeist" or "Typus" or "Urformen" (pre-existing formen). The main idea of the paleontologist Dacque is that human is final product of evolution. There are only idealistic, platonic "Formen" that underlie biological evolution. New types arouse suddenly and science doesn't have enough instruments to elucidate the process. The evolution is teleological process aimed for perfection and emergence of human. "Entelechie" of human is present from the beginning of the evolution and consequently human has no ancestors. It may be of interest that Leo Berg mentioned Dacque in his Nomogenesis - evolution directed by law. His concept is very similar of that of Dacque of development of a pre-existing Plan.I would like to know if you have ever heard about German idealistic morphology and if there are any people here who could agree with directed process of evolution.The interesting material about thinking and concepts of Naef, Dacque, Troll in German is here:"Goethes langer Atem: Methodologische Ideologien
in der Deutschen Morphologie des 20. Jahrhunderts*".http://www.evolutionsbiologen.de/goethesatem.pdfThe material summarizes the main ideas of German idealistic morphologists. Form developes by it's own inherent rules - consequently form precedes function. Similar as Dalai-Lama is reincarnation of Bodhisattva, but not his descendant, so according Goethe Being, creature is "Incarnation" of Type, but no way a step on evolutionary development. Paleontological types are "real" because they show up in paleontological research. But they are also "unreal" because they are only manifestation of "genuine" types. Underestanding of living phenomenons is possible only through combination of "intuitive research" with its platonic concept of "underestanding as recalling", by Troll as "underestanding as resonance". This is the main base of underestanding. Kant's analytical way of research presents itself in theory of Natural Selection and Genetics.According Troll the processes in Nature are nowhere, and especially not in organic areas, necessity of pure chance, but the presentment of the world-reason.Some materials could be found also on internet. Troll was a prominent botanist whose work was accepted world-wide.[Wilhelm Troll (1897-1978). The tradition of idealistic morphology in the German botanical sciences of the 20th century]PubMedEdited by MartinV, : No reason given.Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.Edited by MartinV, : No reason given.

Done.It is really hard for me to translate it from German to English. It has more to do with philosophical thinking and German biologists had often solved problem of Goethes and Kant's approach to reality.

I don't think it is so important - I put it at the end as you may have noticed.

AdminNosy,I suppose that my text has been arranged as you demanded. Is there still any problem?

I wrote at the end of my post some ideas I picked up from the material as you have reccomended me.I am looking forward to other reccomendation.

It's up to you. But let me know - I participate only at Biological evolution. Because I mentioned Kant Brad McFall would probably like to comment it.

Thank you from your posts. The theory of directed evolution, orthogenesis, had a long tradition in pre-war Germany. Many researchs and many observations had been done. Nowadays are most of them fully forgotten even if they are surprisingly interesting. I hit on this page from Hans Gadow where he describes Theodor Eimer's concept of "undulatory development". Probably one has to go to antiquarian bookshop to get such interesting reading. Especially noticeable is the last sentence about Eimer's law of posterior-anterior development which has obviously nothing to do with darwinism: http://links.jstor.org/sici?...Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Shorten display form of link.

Prominent German botanist professor Wilhelm Troll wrote in his two-volumes text-book (600 pages) that all seed-plants are to be considered as variation of ideal "Urpflanze" which he schematically presented in the first pages. Reading first 100 pages of his text-book I would say I agree. I am afraid that none of his antidarwinian books have ever been translated into English. I don't know if ever some botanist challenged his work.Praktische Einfhrung in die Pflanzenmorphologie. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena 1957

I am afraid Troll was no way a darwinist:

quote:

---

The peculiarity of living beings is determined by ””thoughts and ideas of a creative power which penetrates from the ideal world [Welthintergrunde] into nature, which gives new characteristics to matter and creates the type-like basic organic forms’’7 (Troll, 1937, VI).

---

More at "The history of essentialism vs. Ernst Mayr’s ””Essentialism
Story’’: A case study of German idealistic morphology" herehttp://www.evolutionsbiologen.de/levit-tib.pdf

Many scientists of the so-called German school opposed darwinism. Their work 1890-1945 are neglected by the neodarwinian school but it still exist. There were many scientific journals written in German in those years across the Europe. Fortunatelly some of them - even the whole volumes - have appeared on inet recently and are available for download now. Many interesting articles for those who can read German and are interested in non-darwinian ideas about evolution of the forgotten (and neglected) days :Internet Archive Search: Naturwissenschaftliche WochenschriftEdited by MartinV, : No reason given.