Sunday, 28 December 2025

Evolution Without Essence: 1 Darwin — Variation Without Ground

Darwin opens the door without naming what he has undone.

He offers an account of transformation without essence, of persistence without blueprint, of order without ground — and then refuses to follow the implications where they lead.

This refusal is not a failure. It is the condition under which On the Origin of Species could be written at all.


Variation Comes First

Darwin does not begin with form, function, or purpose. He begins with variation.

Variation is not explained. It is assumed.

Individuals differ. Offspring are not identical to parents. Traits fluctuate, recombine, appear, and disappear. This restless heterogeneity is not derived from a deeper principle; it is the material with which evolution works.

Darwin does not ground variation.
He relies on it.


Selection as Constraint, Not Cause

Natural selection is often misread as an active force — a shaping hand, an optimiser, a hidden teleology.

Darwin’s own formulation is far more restrained.

Selection does not produce variation. It does not direct change. It does not foresee outcomes. It simply constrains which variations persist under particular conditions.

Selection eliminates.
It does not create.

In this sense, natural selection functions as a filter, not an engine.


Explanation Without Essence

Crucially, Darwin does not explain what a species is. He explains how populations change.

Species appear as temporary stabilisations within a moving field of variation — names for patterns that hold long enough to be recognised, not essences that precede their instances.

This is Darwin’s most radical move, and also the one he least emphasises.

There is no underlying form toward which evolution tends.
There is only differential persistence.


The Reluctant Revolutionary

Like Planck, Darwin introduces a formal necessity without embracing its ontological cost.

To make natural selection intelligible, Darwin must abandon fixed essences. But he repeatedly reinscribes them at the level of language: species, traits, functions, adaptations.

These are pragmatic necessities, not ontological commitments — but the distinction is never made explicit.

Darwin opens the door.
He does not step through.


What Darwin Refuses to Ask

Darwin does not ask what grounds variation itself.

He does not ask whether identity persists across generations in any strict sense.

He does not ask whether “the same trait” across contexts is truly the same.

He does not ask whether evolutionary explanation presupposes stable entities it cannot justify.

These silences are not oversights. They are stabilising omissions.


Variation Without Ground

From a relational perspective, Darwin’s variation is not a problem to be solved.

It is the mark of a field of possibility that cannot be reduced to underlying essences.

Variation is not noise around a signal.
It is the signal.

There is no privileged baseline from which deviation occurs. There is only differential actualisation under constraint.


Identity Deferred

If variation is primary, identity becomes secondary.

What persists across generations is not a thing, but a pattern of constraint — a lineage that holds together long enough to be named, studied, and explained.

Darwin gestures toward this, but retreats from it.

To follow it fully would be to abandon the idea that evolution tracks the history of things.

Instead, it would track the history of cuts.


The Price of Restraint

Darwin’s restraint made evolutionary theory possible.

But it also set the stage for later intolerances:

  • the search for the true unit of selection

  • the reification of genes as bearers of identity

  • the stabilisation of fitness as a property

  • the transformation of adaptation into optimisation

  • the quiet reintroduction of teleology

All of these can be read as attempts to restore ground where Darwin removed it.


What Changes If We Do Not Restore It?

If variation has no ground, then evolutionary explanation cannot converge on a final description.

If identity is not preserved, then lineages are not entities but trajectories.

If selection is constraint, then evolution does not explain why forms arise — only why some persist.

This does not weaken evolutionary theory.

It clarifies it.


Opening the Series

Darwin is not the endpoint of this story. He is the opening move.

By placing variation first, he makes possible an account of becoming without essence — and then declines to live fully within it.

The following posts will trace how evolutionary thought repeatedly attempts to recover what Darwin set aside: stable identity, grounded fitness, unified perspective.

Not to criticise these attempts.

But to understand what they cannot tolerate.

No comments:

Post a Comment