Main Interpretations of the “Eclipse” of Darwinism

This chapter examines historical and philosophical interpretations of the “eclipse of Darwinism.” Ernst Mayr’s classic interpretation suggests that Darwin’s theory underwent a gradual acceptance, with the first Darwinian revolution occurring through the acceptance of the evolution of life and a common ancestor, while the synthetic theory of evolution constituted the second revolution. Mayr attributes delays in acceptance to non-scientific factors that led to the development of anti-Darwinian theories. Peter Bowler’s concept of a “non-Darwinian revolution” challenges Darwin’s position of dominance in evolutionary biology, suggesting that its rise was due not to the Darwinian revolution but to a “non-Darwinian revolution.” This interpretation reassesses the period of “eclipse” and the emergence of the modern synthesis. Modern interpretations include Mark Largent’s “interphase of Darwinism,” which suggests that Darwinism was still popular during the “eclipse,” leading to the modern synthesis. The chapter also examines the philosophy of David Hull and the “extended synthesis” of Massimo Pigliucci and Gerd B. Müller. It considers modern critical approaches to the “eclipse” and the modern synthesis, challenging the idea of the latter as a scientific revolution. The chapter explores how these considerations reshape the understanding of the “eclipse of Darwinism.”