Denis Noble: "Neo-Darwinism Is Dead" | We Need A Biology Beyond Genes

Summary

Biology should move beyond genes as the sole cause of life

Denis Noble challenges the idea that an organism is ultimately controlled by its genes in a one-way chain from DNA to proteins to cells and the whole body. Genes are essential, he argues, but they do not independently determine how an organism functions. Cells, tissues, organs, organisms, and their environments also influence what genes do.

Noble calls this biological relativity: causation operates in both directions across biological organization. No single level—molecules, cells, organs, or whole organisms—has exclusive authority over the others.

The heartbeat illustrates how biological activity can arise without a central command

Noble describes the first heartbeat, which begins early in embryonic development, before the nervous system exists. In the 1950s, he developed a mathematical model of heart cells and found that rhythmic activity could be self-exciting: it did not require a single master oscillator or an external command telling the heart to beat.

He presents this as an example of a broader point: living systems can generate organized activity through interactions within the system, rather than receiving every instruction from a central controller.

DNA depends on living cells

Noble disputes the claim that DNA can account for life by itself:

• DNA replication in cells relies on enzymes that detect and repair errors. The cell also controls when it divides.
• Proteins do not always fold or function in one predetermined way based on their sequences. Their environment and cellular context affect what they do.
• Signals can travel from a cell’s surface to its nucleus, influencing which genes are activated. Noble uses a “Paris to Leiden” analogy to describe how a signal can cross a cell and affect the genome.

His conclusion is that both genome replication and protein function depend on the activity and organization of living cells.

Organisms exhibit agency and purpose-directed behavior

Noble argues that concepts such as agency, activity, and purpose are necessary for describing living systems, even if the mechanisms behind them are not fully understood. Examples discussed include:

• Heart cells generating rhythmic activity.
• The immune system producing and selecting antibodies that can recognize new threats.
• Groups of frog-skin cells studied by Michael Levin organizing into mobile, food-seeking forms called xenobots.
• Cells sending signals to one another to help maintain tissues.

Noble distinguishes recognizing that such behavior occurs from fully explaining how it works at the molecular level.

Evolution involves more than random genetic change and natural selection

Noble rejects what he calls neo-Darwinist reductionism, not Darwin’s idea of natural selection itself. He argues that natural selection acting on random genetic changes alone may not explain the pace and complexity of evolution. He points to processes such as gene rearrangement and the movement of genetic material—including Barbara McClintock’s research on “jumping genes”—as evidence that genomes can change in response to cellular and environmental conditions.

He also emphasizes that Darwin considered the inheritance of acquired characteristics and forms of agency, though these ideas are not central to the modern neo-Darwinist account.

Cancer and the immune system show the importance of organization

Noble describes cancer as a group of cells that can behave like an organism within the body, pursuing its own survival rather than cooperating with the larger organism. He suggests that defective cells arise regularly, but the immune system usually detects and removes them. The immune system must balance destroying abnormal cells against avoiding attacks on healthy tissue, which can cause autoimmune disease.

He discusses whether research on bioelectric signaling might offer new ways to influence cell behavior, while noting that immune processes are also central to cancer control.

Association is not the same as causation

Noble cautions against treating genetic correlations as direct explanations of disease or behavior. Biological systems often have redundancy: multiple pathways can contribute to the same function, so disrupting one factor may have only a limited effect.

He cites a study using genetic and health data that, as he describes it, found that combined genetic risk scores predicted diseases only weakly. He argues that this helps explain why expectations that genome sequencing would quickly lead to cures for illnesses such as cancer were not fulfilled.

The implications extend to society, free will, and personal identity

Noble warns that genetic determinism can encourage the belief that people are powerless to change their behavior. He rejects the idea that genes alone determine criminality or conditions such as schizophrenia, emphasizing instead the influence of social and environmental factors.

He also argues that the self is not located solely in the brain or body. A person’s identity develops through interaction with other people and culture; in this sense, the self is a process rather than a fixed object.

Science needs to engage with philosophy and the humanities

Noble says biological explanations always rely on assumptions about causality, purpose, and what counts as evidence. He argues that science cannot entirely avoid philosophical questions and that the sciences should not be treated as enemies of poetry, music, art, or other humanistic pursuits.

He discusses “order emerging from chaos”: variation and randomness can help biological systems adapt and learn. He connects this idea to biological evolution and to learning in artificial intelligence, while cautioning that current AI cannot necessarily reproduce the open-ended uncertainty of living beings.

On quantum mechanics and consciousness, Noble relays Roger Penrose’s caution that quantum mechanics itself is not fully understood and should not be invoked as a simple explanation for consciousness. Noble suggests that some questions may remain beyond current scientific knowledge.

Noble’s advice to young people

Noble’s practical message is to help young people believe that they can act, learn, and find a direction, even when institutions or established scientific paradigms make their path difficult. He describes mentoring early-career researchers and students, supporting people who challenge prevailing assumptions, and encouraging curiosity rather than prescribing a single worldview.

Speakers and sources featured

Speakers in the interview

• Denis Noble — physiologist and emeritus professor; the main interviewee. His first name is occasionally mistranscribed as “Dennis” in the subtitles.
• Hans Busstra — interviewer and host of the Essentia Foundation channel.

People and works discussed or cited

• Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace — natural selection; Darwin’s writings on inheritance and sexual selection.
• Francis Crick, James Watson, Maurice Wilkins, and Rosalind Franklin — the central dogma and the discovery of DNA’s structure.
• Richard Dawkins — The Selfish Gene and gene-centered accounts of evolution.
• Erwin Schrödinger — What Is Life?
• Barbara McClintock — research on mobile genetic elements.
• Michael Levin — bioelectric signaling and xenobots.
• Raymond Noble — Denis Noble’s brother and co-author of Understanding Living Systems; the title appears garbled in the subtitles.
• Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff — quantum mechanics, microtubules, and consciousness.
• John Wheeler — the idea of a self-excited universe.
• Benedict Spinoza, René Descartes, and Aristotle — philosophical views on mind, nature, causality, and organization.
• Alan Turing — randomness and learning.
• B. F. Skinner — behaviorism.
• Benedict Rattigan — co-author, with Noble and a science writer, of The Language of Symmetry.
• Essentia Foundation — publisher of the interview.