International Journal of Comparative Psychology

There is much in common between comparative psychologyand biological tradition that includes such distinguished figures as poetscientist Goethe, evolutionist Lamarck, embryologist Driesch; andcloser to our time, D'Arcy Thompson, Alfi-ed North Whitehead, JosephNeedham, Richard Goldschmidt and Conrad Waddington. This traditionhas been variously referred to as organized, holist, neovitalist, and soon, though none of the labels are completely accurate. Its chiefconcernis the study of living organization at different levels each with its owndistinctive emphasis. Nevertheless, these people share a passionatecommitment to vital process and a refusal to be seduced by simplisticpseudoexplanations at every turn. The levels of organization apparentin the living world today have emerged in the course of evolution:from molecules and protocells (see Fox, 1984 and refs. therein) toprotists; from the first multicellular organisms to communities ofanimals and plants, and finally to intricate human societies. All theseproducts of evolution coexist and are interdependent because they arepart of one evolutionary process. The key to the survival of our planetlies in a proper appreciation of the continuity which exists among the physicochemical, biological and sociocultural realms. It is from thisperspective of the unity of nature that a biologist like myself maybe encouraged to address psychologists on the implications that recent advances in molecular genetics have on our study of developmentand evolution.