You say that
> We all know well that in the development of an organism,
> "ontogeny recapitulates philogeny"
Actually, this idea has been thoroughly discredited. For a discussion of what
probably comes the closest to this idea, see "Von Baer's Law of Development,
Generative Entrenchment, and Scientific Change" by William C. Wimwatt. (Full
citation is in the evolutionary theory bibliography on the WWW)
> the development of scientific concepts (and many other skills
> and abilities) of a growing person resembles the historical progress of
science
> to about the extent that the fetuses growth recapitulates biological
> evolutionary process.
Which is (or should be) to say, very little if at all.
Your further talk of "environment-guided" leads me to think that either you need
to study evolution much more thoroughly, or you would do well to take greater
care in writing on the topic.
I'm pretty sure this message will read as more hostile than I actually am. At
the present I can't refine it into a more gentle version, so if it's too harsh,
I'm sorry.
-----T