Chris Gordon-Smith 

> > TT:-
> > If there's only one living thing, then it can certainly evolve by
> > performing experiments on itself and choosing those that turn out
> > favourably.  However the experiments need not have their own
> > distinct "bodies" - they can be somatic parts of the single
> > evolving organism.

> CG:-
> If the living entity has parts that are being used in trial and error
> experiments, they will need to have different phenotypes. Are two such
> parts with different phenotypes actually different individuals in
> competition with one another, or are they just parts of a larger whole?

>snip<

JE:-
This CRITICAL question can be more rigorously
be approached using sets and testable definitions 
of fitness. Firstly, you have to differentiate
between what you mean by a _dependent_ and 
an _independent_ fitness. I think
you will find that fitness dependent
sets are nested sets but fitness independent
sets are common intersecting sets. Using this 
view, parts are represented by single nested 
sets of fitness and a whole is one complete
nested set. A nested set is a _non_ reversible
hierarchy of sets. In such a hierarchy only
selection the highest possible hierarchal
nested element determines the selection at 
every other nested element, i.e. only ONE fitness
level is testability causative to all other
nested levels of fitness. For some unknown
reason the multi level theorists that post
here will not reply to this simple argument.

Regards,

John Edser
Independent Researcher

PO Box 266
Church Pt
NSW 2105
Australia

edser{at}tpg.com.au
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 8/5/04 6:37:03 AM