Life as Evolving Software... (Chaitin) (Humans)

by David Turell , Tuesday, December 27, 2011, 18:00 (4514 days ago) @ dhw

And this is the source of the misunderstanding. I hate to say it, but once again we have a problem of terminology. Gradualism, as I understand it, is not the flow of genetic information from generation to generation, but the theory that (a) complex organs evolved in tiny stages rather than by single mutations (Darwin says: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." (Origin, p. 214), and (b) evolution proceeds at a relatively constant rate – Dawkins talks of a “continuous and shallow slope up Mount Improbable” (God Delusion, p. 124).

Thank you for these exact quotes. I've read them, and digested them, but when I use my digested comments, instead of the exact quotes, it doesn't have the import of your presentation. Matt should surely see that the fossil research since Darwin does not show this type of gradualism. This is Gould's point. This is partially why the leaders of Neo-Darwinism are looking for a new paradigm with the Altenberg conferencce.

To sum up, the confusion here arises because you have a different definition of gradualism from that used by David and myself. You appear to accept the theory of punctuated equilibrium (i.e. there is no “real difference between evolution that ‘speeds up’ and PE”), and so there is no disagreement. Epigenetics is being discussed as a possible mechanism for rapid evolution. David’s pre-planning theory is another conjecture.

I again reiterate that Shapiro's book needs to be digested. Lamark is back in spades.