Darwinism is the most Reasonable Theory for Life on Earth

This is the last argument of the last round. I am arguing against the proposition that Darwinism is the most Reasonable Theory for Life on Earth because Darwinism in its original form, which my opponent advocates, is not the most reasonable and, indeed, pretty outdated "research tradition". To make things clear, in the technically first round I have explained what is meant by Darwinism. I have provided evidence and successfully argued against the limited nature of Darwin's Darwinism as a "scientific tradition" described by Laudan (1973). Besides, have further advanced the debate by referencing modern and post-modern synthesises that have developed from alternative theories to Darwin's and, of course, Darwin's original one.In fact, my opponent in both rounds supports such definition of Darwinism. She clearly draws a line with Darwinism to Charles Darwin. Even though the second round of my opponent was not original but entirely copied, bringing down authenticity of the content and position of my opponent, it focuses only on the minor part of the modern theory of life on Earth. Whereas, my position reconciles modern advances in fields of genetics, molecular biology and studies of genomics and other significant progresses in 21st century science, as well as medieval perspective on life (Aristotelianism) and 19 th century Darwinism (*for more details (7)). As you can see on the intuitive graph below(taken from Wikipedia (7)), Modern synthesis of early 20th century, which has taken place around 100 years ago, only partly resembles Darwin's work. The left side of the picture leads to the Natural Selection advanced by Charles Darwin. Whereas, the right side has a separate distinctive from Darwin's work beginning in Non-Darwinian theory of Evolution. According to Wikipedia(6), "Where the fact of evolutionary change was accepted but the mechanism proposed by Charles Darwin, natural selection, was denied, explanations of evolution such as Lamarckism, catastrophism, orthogenesis, vitalism, structuralism and mutationism (called saltationism before 1900) were entertained." s://upload.wikimedia.org...; alt="" />(if the picture does not work : https://en.wikipedia.org...(20th_century)#/media/File:Modern_Synthesis.svg )Modern synthesis of early 20th century has embraced Darwinians and Non-Darwinian theories of evolution. Therefore, it is fair to say that it only partly consists of Darwinian work and partly from Non-Darwinian one. Therefore, Darwin's work is an artifact from history, showing significance of human work, industriousness and effort. Yes, it developed our research practices, however, only partly and to a small extent viable to current scientists.To advance the debate even further, I want to introduce and elaborate the Developmental systems theory as "an overarching theoretical perspective on biological development, heredity, and evolution"(8). This theory shows the inadequacy of developed in 20th century biology on the role of genes and natural selection as the principle explanation of living structures. In short, this perspective argues that adaptation shapes passively as opposed to view of active organisms actively defining and selecting. The modern synthesis has extensively reduced the world to a "selfish gene" and forgot about environment . As a result, it falsely justifies only simplistic perspective focused on distribution of genes. Actually, a natural system is more than simply genes, it is also consist of living organisms building,shaping its environment and continual inheritance of its material properties. To provide refined and intuitive analogy "once termites have begun to build their monumental nests, it is the demands of living in those very nests to which future generations of termite must adapt."(8).To conclude, I have successfully argued against the Darwinism as the most relevant and reasonable theory of living organisms. modern synthesis of 20th century has advanced further through the research practices advocated by 19th century scientists. Non-Darwinian theories made a significant contribution to the current developments in biology and genetics. Finally, the Development systems theory provides a fresh perspective on evolution and brings hope that we will be able to advance further our current state of scientific research.(5) https://en.wikipedia.org...(6) https://en.wikipedia.org...(7) https://en.wikipedia.org...(20th_century)(8) https://en.wikipedia.org...