The Origin of Specious: misunderstandings about Patrick Matthew’s evolutionary thinking

Abstract

Abstract Many ambiguities in Patrick Matthew’s evolutionary ideas can be resolved upon rejecting the presumption that his mechanism was identical to Darwin’s. This presumption has led to two ingrained interpretations which we show are false. First, competitive natural selection plays no role in Matthew’s lineage splitting. On the contrary, it is absent during his comparably short phases of adaptive radiation occurring after catastrophes. Catastrophes eliminate competition, and the competitive vacuum pulls the surviving species apart and unleashes their indwelling variational force. Separate populations adapt to new circumstances through variation and non-competitive survival. Second, competitive natural selection does not drive Matthew’s lineage adaptation either. When it is active, during the comparably long phases of conformity that follow adaptive radiation, the environment directly leads the system towards adaptation. Lineages adapt to changing circumstances but do not split. Interpreting Matthew’s statements accordingly makes sense of his evolutionary thinking that seemed obscure for over a century, especially his statements about the fixity of species and the species problem.