from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition
- n. Biology The theory that the evolution of a species is influenced most strongly by internal factors and is not subject to the external forces of natural selection.
- n. The theory that all cultures pass through sequential periods in the same order.
from Wiktionary, Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License
- n. A series of similar mutations in successive generations, producing evolutionary change.
from The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia
- n. The direct or immediate origin of species, according to the opinion that it takes place by the ‘organic growth’ of one species into another in a definite line which is predetermined by the constitution which outward circumstances have given to each organism.
The use of “evolution” to describe a predictable progressive alteration of phenotype usually is classified under the idea of orthogenesis which I think has been discredited.
We should thus arrive at a demonstration of what Eimer called orthogenesis, or evolution in definite directions.
But could those early storytellers have actually been feeling their way around the idea of orthogenesis, i.e., spontaneous birth, where life has the innate ability to move linearly?
The quotes above seem to be not so much anti-evolution, but in favor of a kind of orthogenesis which can be entirely materialist.
We have tried to prove, on the contrary, by the example of the eye, that if there is "orthogenesis" here, a psychological cause intervenes.
In a later paper  Eimer proposes the term "orthogenesis," or direct development, in rigorous conformity to law, in a few definite directions.
This is not the same as Croizat's "orthogenesis," according to which populations of a single species, after becoming separated from each other, evolve in parallel due to some internal directive force.
Yes, genetics and the now defunct idea of "orthogenesis" (not evolution) were given as a illogic does it take to blame pseudo-science on science in the first place?
* In particular, some discussions of evolution being directionless, purposeless, random, etc., are either addressing historical controversies in evolutionary biology – e.g. inheritance of acquired characters, orthogenesis, recapitulation, vitalism, and the like.
Because much of what they say is a tacit or explicit appeal to concepts like saltationism, vitalism, orthogenesis and Lamarckism.