Contingency and convergence in the theory of evolution: Stephen Jay Gould vs. Simon Conway Morris

Debating the interpretation of Burgess Shale fossil records, Stephen Jay Gould and Simon Conway Morris have formulated two conflicting theses regarding nature evolutionary processes. While argued that evolution is essentially a contingent process whose outcomes are unpredictable, claimed omnipresence convergence testifies it in fact deterministic, leading to predictable inevitable outcomes. Their been extensively researched from various perspectives. However, systematic parallel analysis core arguments each them offered support their thesis has lacking. I argue successfully exposed weaknesses Gould's comprehensive account favor major role history. On other hand, will point out some weak points latter's supporting deterministic view life's evolution. Although more successful arguing for processes, both could be improved if shortcomings taken into consideration.