Repository | Book | Chapter

This paper discusses the role that Konrad Lorenz, already known as the founding father of comparative ethology, played from the 1940s in the birth and development of a new research area, important for its philosophical and scientific fallout: Evolutionary Epistemology (EE). The first and second sections examine the auroral phase of this process: the successful collaboration between the young Lorenz and the philosopher E. Baumgarten; their attempt to rework the Kantian doctrine of knowledge in the light of the Darwinian theory of selection and evolution; the landing of Lorenz to a first formulation of his "phylogenetic apriorism" with the essay Kant's Doctrine of the A Priori in the Light of Contemporary Biology (Lorenz in Kant's doctrine of the a priori in light of contemporary biology 1941). In this paper, Lorenz elaborated the theoretical core of an original synthesis between Darwinism and Kantism, and between ethology and theory of knowledge, which later, in Behind the Mirror, led him to conceive the anatomical, morphological and behavioral differentiation of the species as a "process of acquisition of knowledge" (Lorenz in Behind the Mirror. A Search for a Natural History of Human Knowledge. Meuthen& Co, London, 1973). The following sections examine the development of EE from the 1970s to the 2000s. In the early 1970s Lorenz's "Search for a Natural History of Human Knowledge" seemed to converge with the reflections independently developed by the philosopher K. Popper and the psychologist D. Campbell. From the dialogue between the three scholars stemmed the first program of Evolutionary Epistemology (EE): an "integrated theory" that aimed at clarifying both the continuities and differences between biological evolution and human socio-cultural development. The analysis shows how, apart from some common general assumptions, a number of fundamental divergences emerged among the EE's founding fathers, specifically regarding their explanation of the internal organization of living beings and of the human social, cultural and scientific evolution, which, notwithstanding their efforts, turned out to be impossible to reconcile. The penultimate section provides a concise chronology of EE developments. The last section outlines, in the form of a work in progress which needs further development, the profile of an ethology of knowledge which, starting from Lorenz, should take into account the development of contemporary ethological, epigenetic and evolutionary research.

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-66914-4_22

Full citation: