An Analysis Of Troublesome Metaphors

1281 Words3 Pages

In the introduction of her 2003 book Developmental Plasticity and Evolution, West-Eberhard presents "Six Points of Confusion and Controversy". In her fifth point entitled “Troublesome Metaphors”, West-Eberhard states that metaphors will always be deficient in their ability to relate the complex interactions between genetics, development, and the environment. While I would agree with much of what West-Eberhard says about metaphors, she makes some points that will be questioned in this essay.

The environment can refer to many things. In order to explain its relationship with evolution and development, the “environment” must be defined. The environment may include the place that surrounds the mother, but also may include where the embryo develops (the reproductive tract, or in vitro culture), and the gonad where gametes develop prior to fertilization. Environmental conditions can have an impact on the …show more content…

Her reasoning is because the environment can only guide the ball to a phenotype. The ball is not continuously guided down different pathways as it moves by the environment. In addition, the definition of epigenetic has narrowed since the days of Waddington from all things acting “above the genome” to just the methylation and acetylation of genes. The influences of proteins adjusting the contours would not, at present, be referred to as “epigenetic”. West-Eberhard strongly criticizes Waddington 's metaphor in relation to evolutionary change. However, based on his book: The Evolution of an Evolutionist, it does not appear that Waddington was using this metaphor as a way to explain how the combination of genetics, development, and the environment influence evolution (Waddington 1975). It seems rather, that Waddington was attempting to show how the three might work together. West-Eberhard is too harsh with this metaphor, and criticizing it for being something that it was never intended to

Open Document