Evolution (Introduction)

by David Turell , Tuesday, July 28, 2009, 16:48 (5596 days ago) @ xeno6696

Purposeful endpoint? Hate to sound postmodern, but that's entirely dependent upon what it is that you're graphing. - > This is as good as a recreation to what I think a "random walk" that Gould would be referencing. I have no clue how close I am to his argument... - I think you have helped. Gould used a drunkard's walk to start his chapter. That example has teleology; the drunk wants to get home. But Gould's overall purpose was to say most random walks in evolution have no purpose. He didn't think through the implications of his first example. I have always admired his writing ability. I wish I could handle words so well. - Gould wrote with an underlying bias. He profoundly believed in the contingency of random mutation. He said humans were a 'glorious accident'. He used the Burgess Shale in Wonderful Life to drive that point home. The Shale had one protovertibrate, Pikaia (a fish). In his view that was the one lucky break to get to us. He wrote too soon. In the recent work in China shales at least 3-4 other fish have been found, obviously different species. So much for contingency. When evolution explodes, it obviously explodes in several branches at the same level with several species. This is Conway Morris' theory of convergence, which wins the day. Humans are not contingent, which leads me to suspect that the directionality of evolution to the more complex is built into DNA/RNA. And so I have brought the discussion back to teleology.