More Denton: Another review of Denton's new book (Introduction)

by dhw, Saturday, May 28, 2016, 11:47 (3101 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: How many more times do we have to agree that Darwin's gradualism is out?
DAVID: Because you do not think of saltation the way I do. I made much of this in my first book. Gradualism is NEVER the point. We are discussing giant leaps in form and functionality. Saltation looks and smells like magical advances. Nothing explains them, but there they are! Perhaps God, a supernatural force? - It is you who keep quoting authors who flog the dead horse of gradualism. I agree with you entirely on the subject of “magical” saltations, but how often do we have to repeat that nobody can explain them? That is why we come up with different hypotheses: Darwin's random mutations, now matched by your shotgun complexifications; your 3.8-billion-year computer programme for all innovations and natural wonders; your divine dabbles; separate creation; my autonomous inventive mechanism (depending on cellular intelligence). Nobody knows. - dhw: Saltation of innovations, engineered by the autonomous intelligence of cells - yep, fits my hypothesis exactly. - DAVID: Yep, pipe dreams of superior planning intelligence hidden in bacteria who plotted to become multicellular, a process which is not understood, but looks like saltation. - Of course it's saltation, but in this particular instance, Margulis's theory did not involve plotting. She suggests that the symbiosis originally took place by chance. The intelligence comes in with the recognition of mutual benefit, which then leads to further exploration of the potential benefits of symbiosis and cooperation. Humans also make accidental discoveries and then develop them. (But to anticipate your usual riposte, that is an analogy: bacteria think like bacteria, and humans think like humans.)