Punctuated Equilibrium - Criticism

Criticism

Richard Dawkins believes that the apparent gaps represented in the fossil record document migratory events rather than evolutionary events. According to Dawkins, evolution certainly occurred but "probably gradually" elsewhere. However, the punctuational equilibrium model may still be inferred from both the observation of stasis and examples of rapid and episodic speciation events documented in the fossil record.

Dawkins also emphasizes that punctuated equilibrium has been "oversold by some journalists", but partly due to Eldredge and Gould's "later writings". Dawkins contends that the theory "does not deserve a particularly large measure of publicity". It is a "minor gloss," an "interesting but minor wrinkle on the surface of neo-Darwinian theory," and "lies firmly within the neo-Darwinian synthesis".

In his book Darwin's Dangerous Idea, philosopher Daniel Dennett is especially critical of Gould's presentation of punctuated equilibrium. Dennett argues that Gould alternated between revolutionary and conservative claims about the theory, and that each time Gould made a revolutionary statement—or appeared to do so—he was criticized, and thus retreated to a traditional neo-Darwinian position. Gould responded to Dennett's claims in The New York Review of Books, and in his technical volume The Structure of Evolutionary Theory.

Literary scholar Heidi Scott argued that Gould's use of analogy and metaphor constitutes a non-scientific discourse attempting to validate a scientific theory. She claims that Gould—particularly in his popular essays—uses a variety of strategies from literature, political science, and personal anecdotes to substantiate the general pattern of punctuated equilibrium (long periods of stasis interrupted by rapid, catastrophic change). Gould responded that critics often made the mistake of confusing the context of discovery with the context of justification. While Gould is celebrated for the color and energy of his prose, as well as his massive interdisciplinary knowledge, critics such as Scott have concerns that the theory has gained undeserved credence among non-scientists because of Gould's rhetorical skills.

John Lyne and Henry Howe, in a more positive evaluation, states that "re-analysis of existing fossil data has shown, to the increasing satisfaction of the paleontological community, that Eldredge and Gould were correct in identifying periods of evolutionary stasis which are interrupted by much shorter periods of evolutionary change."