Prolegomenon to patterns in evolution

Despite Darwin, we remain children of Newton and dream of a grand theory that is epistemologically complete and would allow prediction of the evolution of the biosphere. The main purpose of this article is to show that this dream is false, and bears on studying patterns of evolution. To do so, I must justify the use of the word “function” in biology, when physics has only happenings. The concept of “function” lifts biology irreducibly above physics, for as we shall see, we cannot prestate the ever new biological functions that arise and constitute the very phase space of evolution. Hence, we cannot mathematize the detailed becoming of the biosphere, nor write differential equations for functional variables we do not know ahead of time, nor integrate those equations, so no laws “entail” evolution. The dream of a grand theory fails. In place of entailing laws, I propose a post-entailing law explanatory framework in which Actuals arise in evolution that constitute new boundary conditions that are enabling constraints that create new, typically unprestatable, adjacent possible opportunities for further evolution, in which new Actuals arise, in a persistent becoming. Evolution flows into a typically unprestatable succession of adjacent possibles. Given the concept of function, the concept of functional closure of an organism making a living in its world becomes central. Implications for patterns in evolution include historical reconstruction, and statistical laws such as the distribution of extinction events, or species per genus, and the use of formal cause, not efficient cause, laws.