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.

I'd guess this goes in "Misc. Topics in C E".The German is close to useless, I would guess. Translate it or remove it and the rest is an interesting question.

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.

Since you think it is relevant just paraphrase it. I know an exact translation can be tricky.

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

Take it out then. I'd be interested in seeing how much of my German I have left (not much I'm thinkin'). How about your write a little for me to practice on? Coffee house would be fine. Thanks.

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

The German reference is useless to the overwhelming majority of your audience. Since you have left it in there I presume it has something important to say. I suggest that the important point made there will be lost if you leave it as is so supply a paraphrase of the important ideas which made you want to include that reference.I don't see why that is hard to understand. Thanks.

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.

thanks for the clarifications

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.

Thread copied to the Idealistic morphology thread in the Biological Evolution forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.