‘행동의 유전’에 관한 다윈의 진화론과 19세기 신경과학 의 만남: 다윈이 라마르크의 진화론을 극복하는 데 신경과학이 미친 영향
The Connection between Charles Darwin’s Evolutionary Theory of ‘Heredity of Behaviors’ and the 19th Century Neuroscience: The Influence of Neuroscience on Darwin’s Overcoming of Lamarck’s Theory of Evolution
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The nineteenth century neuroscience studied the instinct of animal to understand the human mind. In particular, it has been found that the inheritance of unconscious behavior like instinct is mediated through ganglion chains, such as the spinal cord or sympathetic nervous system, which control unconscious reflexes. At the same time, the theory of Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics (hereafter ‘IAC’) widely known as Lamarck’s evolutionary theory provided the theoretical frame on the origin of instinct and the heredity of action that the parental generation’s habits were converted into the nature of the offspring generation. Contrary to conventional knowledge, this theory was not originally invented by Lamarck, and Darwin also did not discard this theory even after discovering the theory of natural selection in 1838 and maintained it throughout his intellectual life. Above all, in the field of epigenetics, the theory of ‘IAC’ has gained attention as a reliable scientific theory today. Darwin discovered crucial errors in the late 1830s that the Lamarck version’s theory of ‘IAC’ did not adequately account for the principle of the inheritance of unconscious behavior like instinct. Lamarck’s theory regarded habits as conscious and willful acts and saw that those habits are transmitted through the brain to control conscious actions. Lamarck’s theory could not account for the complex and elaborate instincts of invertebrate animals, such as brainless ants. Contrary to Lamarck’s view, Darwin established the new theory of ‘IAC’ that could be combined with contemporary neurological theory, which explains the heredity of unconscious behavior. Based on the knowledge of neurology, Darwin was able to translate the ‘principle of habit’ into a neurological term called ‘principle of reflex’. This article focuses on how Darwin join the theory of ‘IAC’ with nineteenth century neuroscience and how the neurological knowledge from the nineteenth century contributed to Darwin’s overcoming of Lamarck’s ‘IAC’. The significance of this study is to elucidate Darwin’s notion of ‘IAC’ theory rather than natural selection theory as a principle of heredity of behavior. The theory of ‘IAC’ was able to account for the rapid variation of instincts in a relatively short period of time, unlike natural selection, which operates slowly in geological time spans of tens of millions of years. The nineteenth century neurological theory also provided neurological principles for ‘plasticity of instinct,’ empirically supporting the fact that all nervous systems responsible for reflexes respond sensitively to very fine stimuli. However, researchers of neo-Darwinian tendencies, such as Richard Dawkins and evolutionary psychologists advocating the ‘selfish gene’ hypothesis, which today claim to be Darwin’s descendants, are characterized by human nature embedded in biological information, such as the brain and genes, so that it cannot change at all. This study aims to contribute to reconstructing the evolutionary discourse by illuminating Darwin’s insights into the “plasticity of nature” that instincts can change relatively easily even at the level of invertebrates such as earthworms.
Abstract
The nineteenth century neuroscience studied the instinct of animal to understand the human mind. In particular, it has been found that the inheritance of unconscious behavior like instinct is mediated through ganglion chains, such as the spinal cord or sympathetic nervous system, which control unconscious reflexes. At the same time, the theory of Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics (hereafter ‘IAC’) widely known as Lamarck’s evolutionary theory provided the theoretical frame on the origin of instinct and the heredity of action that the parental generation’s habits were converted into the nature of the offspring generation. Contrary to conventional knowledge, this theory was not originally invented by Lamarck, and Darwin also did not discard this theory even after discovering the theory of natural selection in 1838 and maintained it throughout his intellectual life. Above all, in the field of epigenetics, the theory of ‘IAC’ has gained attention as a reliable scientific theory today. Darwin discovered crucial errors in the late 1830s that the Lamarck version’s theory of ‘IAC’ did not adequately account for the principle of the inheritance of unconscious behavior like instinct. Lamarck’s theory regarded habits as conscious and willful acts and saw that those habits are transmitted through the brain to control conscious actions. Lamarck’s theory could not account for the complex and elaborate instincts of invertebrate animals, such as brainless ants. Contrary to Lamarck’s view, Darwin established the new theory of ‘IAC’ that could be combined with contemporary neurological theory, which explains the heredity of unconscious behavior. Based on the knowledge of neurology, Darwin was able to translate the ‘principle of habit’ into a neurological term called ‘principle of reflex’. This article focuses on how Darwin join the theory of ‘IAC’ with nineteenth century neuroscience and how the neurological knowledge from the nineteenth century contributed to Darwin’s overcoming of Lamarck’s ‘IAC’. The significance of this study is to elucidate Darwin’s notion of ‘IAC’ theory rather than natural selection theory as a principle of heredity of behavior. The theory of ‘IAC’ was able to account for the rapid variation of instincts in a relatively short period of time, unlike natural selection, which operates slowly in geological time spans of tens of millions of years. The nineteenth century neurological theory also provided neurological principles for ‘plasticity of instinct,’ empirically supporting the fact that all nervous systems responsible for reflexes respond sensitively to very fine stimuli. However, researchers of neo-Darwinian tendencies, such as Richard Dawkins and evolutionary psychologists advocating the ‘selfish gene’ hypothesis, which today claim to be Darwin’s descendants, are characterized by human nature embedded in biological information, such as the brain and genes, so that it cannot change at all. This study aims to contribute to reconstructing the evolutionary discourse by illuminating Darwin’s insights into the “plasticity of nature” that instincts can change relatively easily even at the level of invertebrates such as earthworms.
참고문헌 (46)
- 다윈, 찰스, "다윈의 비글호 항해기" (2006), 가람기획
- 다윈, 찰스, "종의 기원" (2009), 동서문화사
- 다윈, 찰스, "지렁이의 활동과 분변토의 형성" (2014), 지식을만드는지식
- 다윈, 찰스, "인간과 동물의 감정표현에 관하여" (1998), 서해문집
- 다윈, 찰스, "인간의 유래" (2006), 한길사
- 라마르크, 장 바티스트, "동물철학" (2009), 지식을만드는지식
- Clarke, Edwin, "Nineteenth-Century Origins of Neuroscientific Concepts" (1987), University of California Press
- Darwin, Charles, "Charles Darwin's Notebooks, 1836-1844: Geology, Transmutation of Species, metaphysical Enquiries" (1987), Cambridge University Press
- Darwin, Charles, "The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals" (1998), HarperCollinsPublishers
- Darwin, Charles, "The Power of Movement in Plants" (2009), Cambridge University Press
- Darwin, Charles, "The Works of Charles Darwin" (1988), New York University Press
- Gruber, Howard, "Darwin on Man: A Psychological Study of Scientific Creativity" (1974), Wildwood House
- Neuburger, Max, "The Historical Development of Experimental Brain and Spinal Cord Physiology before Flourens" (1981), The Johns Hopkins University Press
- Todd, R. B, "The Physiological Anatomy" (1839), Marchant Singer
- 굴드, 스티븐 제이, "다윈 이후" (1997), 범양사출판부
- 도킨스, 리처드, "이기적 유전자" (2010), 을유문화사
- 데스몬드, 에이드리언, "다윈평전: 고뇌하는 진화론자의 초상" (2009), 뿌리와이파리
- 라마찬드란, 빌라야누르, "라마찬드란 박사의 두뇌 실험실" (2007), 바다출판사
- 로즈, 힐러리, "급진과학으로 본 유전자·세포·뇌" (2015), 바다출판사
- 랠런드, 케빈, "센스 앤 넌센스" (2014), 동아시아
- 리스, 데이, "새로운 뇌과학" (2010), 한울아카데미
- 박성관, "종의 기원: 생명의 다양성과 인간 소멸의 자연학" (2010), 그린비
- 보울러, 로버트, "찰스 다윈", 전파과학사 (1999)
- 브라운, 재닛, "찰스다윈평전: 1859-1882" (2010), 김영사
- 샤핀, 스티븐, "과학혁명", 영림카디널 (2002)
- 색스, 올리버, "뮤지코필리아", 알마, ~ (2010)
- 웰스, 스펜서, "인류의 조상을 찾아서" (2007), 말·글빛냄
- 장대익, "다윈의 서재" (2015), 바다출판사
- 캔델, 에릭, "기억을 찾아서", 알에이치코리아 (2014)
- 크릭, 프랜시스, "놀라운 가설: 영혼에 관한 과학적 탐구", 궁리 (2015)
- 포더, 제리, "마음은 그렇게 작동하지 않는다", 알마 (2013)
- 포스터, 존 벨라미, "다윈주의와 지적설계론", 인간사랑 (2009)
- 핑커, 스티븐, "사이언스북스", 빈서판 (2009)
- 한선희, "다윈과 함께" (2015), 사이언스북스
- Berkowitz, Carin, "Disputed Discovery: Vivisection and Experiment in the 19th Century", Science Direct, 30, pp.98~102 (2006)
- Bynum, William, "The Anatomical Method, Natural Theology, and the Functions of the Brain", The History of Science Society, 64, pp.445~468 (1973)
- Ekman, Paul, "Darwin and Facial Expression: A Century of Research in Review", Malor Books (2006)
- Godfrey-Smith, Peter, "Other Minds: The Octopus and the Evolution of Intelligent Life", William Collins (2018)
- Jablonka, Eva, "Evolution in Four Dimensions: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and symbolic Variation in the History of Life" (2006), The MIT Press
- Jacyna, Stephen, "The most Important of All the Organs: Darwin on the Brain", Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 132, pp.3481~3487 (2009)
- Montgomery, William, "The Development of Expressive Behavior" (1985), Academic Press
- Park, Chung-Mo, "Stem-piped light activates phytochrome B to trigger light responses in Arabidopsis thaliana roots", Science Signaling, 9, pp.1~8 (2016)
- Richards, Robert, "Instinct and Intelligence in British Natural Theology: Some Contributions to Darwin’s Theory of the Evolution of Behavior", Journal of the History of Biology, 14, pp.193~230 (1981)
- Richards, Robert, "Darwin and the Emergence of Evolutionary Theories of Mind and Behavior" (1987), The University of Chicago Press
- Rose, Hilary, "Can Neuroscience Change Our Minds?" (2016), Polity Press
- Rose, Steven, "The Making of Memory: From Molecules to Mind" (2003), Vintage