from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition
- n. Darwinism as modified by the findings of modern genetics.
from the GNU version of the Collaborative International Dictionary of English
- n. The theory which holds natural selection, as explained by Darwin, to be the chief factor in the evolution of plants and animals, and denies the inheritance of acquired characters; -- esp. opposed to
Neo-Lamarckism. Weismannism is an example of extreme Neo-Darwinism.
from The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia
- n. New or modified Darwinism; specifically, the doctrine or opinion that the survival of the fittest, in the struggle for existence, is an all-sufficient account of the origin of species, as contrasted with Darwin's opinion that natural selection is an important, but not the exclusive means of modification.
from WordNet 3.0 Copyright 2006 by Princeton University. All rights reserved.
- n. a modern Darwinian theory that explains new species in terms of genetic mutations
Sorry, no etymologies found.
If by "Neo-Darwinism" you mean current evolutionary theory, the answer is "yes"; that's exactly what exaptation is all about.
"Did Neo-Darwinism predict co-option of a body part from one species to form an extremely similar-looking body part on another species but with an entirely different placement and function?"
Did Neo-Darwinism predict co-option of a body part from one species to form an extremely similar-looking body part on another species but with an entirely different placement and function?
Well not exactly, Neo-Darwinism sees random mutation as the main mechanism behind evolution.
* Her criticisms of "Neo-Darwinism" are very specific and refer to certain out-dated attitudes which are no longer prevalent in Margulis 'field.
This new theory, or New Synthesis — more commonly known as Neo-Darwinism — is the school that now dominates the scientific landscape.
For example, two of the founders of “Neo-Darwinism” – R.A. Fisher and Theodosious Dobzhansky – were devout Christians, and found no contradiction between their understanding of evolutionary biology and their religious beliefs.
This is an empirically testable hypothesis, one which contradicts a key assumption of Neo-Darwinism.
Let me head off another objection — that Neo-Darwinism leads to Moral-Religious Destructiveness.
I've been skimming through a pamphlet written by the process theologian David Ray Griffin, called, Evolution without Tears: A Third Way beyond Neo-Darwinism and Intelligent Design.