The synergism hypothesis (revisited): a theory whose time has come?

A major theoretical issue in evolutionary biology over the past two decades has concerned the rise of complexity over time in the natural world, and a search has been underway for "a Grand Unified Theory" - as biologist Daniel McShea characterized it - that is consistent with Darwin's great vision. As it happens, such a theory already exists. It was first proposed many years ago in The Synergism Hypothesis: A Theory of Progressive Evolution, and it involves an economic (or perhaps bioeconomic) theory of complexity.

A systems theory of biological evolution.

Contrary to the formulation in the so-called Modern Synthesis, biological evolution has been primarily a history of living systems rather than of individual genes, and it has always been a contingent dynamic process - an always at-risk "survival enterprise." The hallmarks of life on Earth have been persistence (survival), inheritance (reproduction), and functional change over time (adaptation, evolution, and extinction). In addition, living systems have two other distinctive properties: teleonomy (evolved purposefulness) and cybernetic "control information" (the capacity to control the capacity to do work).

"How" vs. "Why" questions in symbiogenesis, and the causal role of synergy.

Mutualistic symbiosis, we now know, is a ubiquitous phenomenon in the natural world. And, in every case, there was an initial "genesis" - a "how" process that may have been at once unique to each situation and perhaps also shared a common set of facilitators. However, a full explanation of symbiogenesis also requires an answer to the "why" question, for natural selection is a stringent economizer.

"Thermoeconomics": Time to move beyond the second law.

The term "thermoeconomics" denotes a paradigm shift in our understanding of the role of energy in living systems, and in evolution. It is based on the proposition that energy in biological evolution can best be defined and understood, not in terms of the Second Law of Thermodynamics but in terms of such economic criteria as productivity, efficiency, and especially the costs and benefits (or "profitability") of various mechanisms for capturing and utilizing energy to build biomass and do work. Thus, thermoeconomics is fully consistent with contemporary evolutionary theory.

Beyond the modern synthesis: A framework for a more inclusive biological synthesis.

Many theorists in recent years have been calling for evolutionary biology to move beyond the Modern Synthesis - the paradigm that has long provided the theoretical backbone for the discipline. Terms like "postmodern synthesis," "integrative synthesis," and "extended evolutionary synthesis" have been invoked by various critics in connection with the many recent developments that pose deep challenges - even contradictions - to the traditional model and underscore the need for an update, or a makeover. However, none of these critics, to this author's knowledge, has to date offered an explicit alternative that could provide a unifying theoretical paradigm for our vastly increased knowledge about living systems and the history of life on Earth (but see Noble 2015, 2017).

"Synergistic selection": a Darwinian frame for the evolution of complexity.

Non-Darwinian theories about the emergence and evolution of complexity date back at least to Lamarck, and include those of Herbert Spencer and the "emergent evolution" theorists of the later nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In recent decades, this approach has mostly been espoused by various practitioners in biophysics and complexity theory. However, there is a Darwinian alternative - in essence, an economic theory of complexity - proposing that synergistic effects of various kinds have played an important causal role in the evolution of complexity, especially in the "major transitions".

Holistic Darwinism: the new evolutionary paradigm and some implications for political science.

Holistic Darwinism is a candidate name for a major paradigm shift that is currently underway in evolutionary biology and related disciplines. Important developments include (1) a growing appreciation for the fact that evolution is a multilevel process, from genes to ecosystems, and that interdependent coevolution is a ubiquitous phenomenon in nature; (2) a revitalization of group selection theory, which was banned (prematurely) from evolutionary biology over 30 years ago (groups may in fact be important evolutionary units); (3) a growing respect for the fact that the genome is not a "bean bag" (in biologist Ernst Mayr's caricature), much less a gladiatorial arena for competing selfish genes, but a complex, interdependent, cooperating system; (4) an increased recognition that symbiosis is an important phenomenon in nature and that symbiogenesis is a major source of innovation in evolution; (5) an array of new, more advanced game theory models, which support the growing evidence that cooperation is commonplace in nature and not a rare exception; (6) new research and theoretical work that stresses the role of nurture in evolution, including developmental processes, phenotypic plasticity, social information transfer (culture), and especially the role of behavioral innovations as pacemakers of evolutionary change (e.g.

"Fair shares": beyond capitalism and socialism, or the biological basis of social justice.

The accumulating scientific evidence -- across many disciplines -- regarding human evolution and the dualities and complexities of human nature indicates that the core ideological assumptions of both capitalism and socialism are simplistic and ultimately irreconcilable. A biologically grounded approach to social justice enables us to articulate a new ideological paradigm that I call ''Fair Shares.'' This paradigm consists of three complementary normative principles.