Conclusion

Abstract

The thrust of our argument agrees with Mayr that there are not grounds for thinking that the paradigm introduced by Darwin has to be rejected or even, in any major way, modified. But I think it is also true that we can conclude, contrary to Mayr, that there is nothing of evidence already in his initial presentation with Wallace, a marshalling of evidence that justified treating it in that special way that Kuhn has called “dogma”. That is not the most judicious of terms, perhaps but the point is clear: after Darwin’ presentation, scientists were wholly justified in taking the theory of the origin of species by natural selection for granted as a guide for their future researches in biology. That at least was what reason dictated, at least if we understand reason in empiricist or positivist terms.

Ernst Mayr has written that

There is no justification whatsoever for the claim that the Darwinian paradigm has been refuted and has to be replaced by something new. It strikes me as almost miraculous that Darwin in 1859 came so close to what would be considered valid 125 years later.¹