Thomas Kuhn? Where are you? Could you comment on this “paradigm” stuff? It’s really your show:
Charles Darwin (1859) managed to put the notion of evolution (as it later came to be known) on the late-nineteenth century scientific agenda, but he did not succeed at all in creating a single, united community of evolutionary biologists. Put differently, Darwin’s original theory of evolution never became a paradigm. Instead, there emerged a large number of not always sharply delineated pre-paradigmatic schools of evolutionists (Bowler 1983) which each interpreted the phenomenon of evolution in a different way and focused on specific biological phenomena that suited their theory best.7 For example, neo-Darwinists were preoccupied with adaptations, mutationists with discontinuous variations and orthogenesists or adherents of the idea of straight-line evolution with (presumed) trends in the fossil record. All of these theories “competed for status” (Largent 2009, p. 3). The standard term for this pre-paradigmatic phase in the history of evolutionary biology is “the eclipse of Darwinism.” …
2.2. The Paradigm
The pre-paradigmatic chaos in evolutionary biology came to an end after the Second World War, when the long genesis of the modern evolutionary synthesis (henceforth MS) culminated in its coronation, at the 1947 Princeton Conference on Genetics, Palaeontology and Evolution, as the first paradigm of evolutionary biology (Smocovitis 1996). Provine speaks in respect with this genesis of an “evolutionary constriction” (1989, p. 61): one pre-paradigmatic approach of evolution, that of population genetics, came out victorious and all other alternatives lost all credibility among a majority of biologists. To be precise, population genetics became the “formalized core of the MS theory”
(Müller 2017, p. 2). Interpreting the History of Evolutionary Biology through a Kuhnian Prism: Sense or Nonsense? Koen B. Tanghe, Lieven Pauwels, Alexis De Tiège, and Johan Braeckman Perspectives on Science 2021 29:1, 1-35
The paper is (open access)
A friend writes to remind us that Richard Goldschmidt (hopeful monsters) and Barbara McClintock (jumping genes) were exceptions to the stranglehold.
See also: Key non-Darwinian evolutionary scientists in the twentieth century