Perplexed in Peoria  wrote or quoted:
> "Tim Tyler"  wrote in message
> > Perplexed in Peoria  wrote or quoted:

> > > This seems to imply that you are talking about a continuation
> > > of a trend which has been present since life's inception.  But,
> > > to a large extent, you are not.  In particular, the predictions
> > > you make in numbered section 1, [snipped!] above, are a whole new
> > > "direction" for life.
> >
> > I like to see the whole process up until a few million years ago
> > as the aftermath of the origin of life.  In other words as life's
> > early stages of development.
> >
> > To me it makes sense when attempting to characterise living systems
> > (and evolution as a whole) to look at the adult form.
> >
> > IMO, that's /got/ to include intelligent design, genetic engineering,
> > i.e. the whole kit and caboodle of the toolbox available to living
> > systems.
> >
> > Looking back at life's childhood is all very well - but it's a bit
> > like discussing the caterpillar without mentioning the butterfly.
> 
> Well, to stay with your metamorphosis metaphor, I might point out
> that you posted to "sci.bio.caterpillars" - one of my favorite
> groups.  Perhaps you should have posted to "alt.econ.butterflies",
> where you could share the podium with Karl Marx, Teilhard de Chardin,
> Aldous Huxley, and Isaac Asimov.

This group is about biology, and biology is the study of life.

I hope "life" should not be narrowly interpreted to mean only
organisms that lived in the past.

IMO, the study of life should permit some looks sideways at what forms 
of life are possible, and what forms of life will come to be.

Hopfully - at the very least - such perspectives should be useful in 
illuminating the phenomena we are currently witnessing.

IMO, this is a good time for such perspectives - since a bit
of the butterfly's wing is beginning to emerge.

Another reason for considering such issues now is that journeys usually 
go more smoothly if the voyagers have some clue about where they are 
going.

Evolutionary biologists are quite well placed to see what will happen:
they have studied the past state of the system - and so should be among
the best-equipped to see where it is most likely headed.

[What about considering things in terms of technological accumulation?]

> Yes, the progressive accumulation of technology does seem to be
> a "law of nature" in some sense, though it is a "law" which
> permits exceptions.

Meteorite strikes and the like.  However these are not common.

Similarly, the second "law" of thermodynamics also permits exceptions.

However, such exceptions are on sufficiently small a scale for nobody to 
notice very much.

> I would claim (and have claimed) that it is best understood as a law 
> of economics, rather than a law of physics or of biology.

It's not a law of physics - any more than the second law of 
thermodynamics is a law of physics.  Like the second law,
it depends on the details of the state of the universe.

> [...] a word of caution.  On my bad days, I fully share Michael
> Ragland's tendency toward pessimism regarding the prospects of
> mankind.  There is a real possibility that we might extinguish
> ourselves.  If we do it in the near future, the biosphere will
> survive, but our cultural technology will not.  If we do it
> after another 500 years of exponential growth in technology,
> then much of the biosphere will not survive and much of the
> legacy biological technology will be lost as well.  And, if
> so, it is far from clear to me that the Earth will get a second
> chance at technological "greatness".

I'm much more optimistic.  IMO, our chances of destroying
ourselves before we spread out enough to made this difficult
are currently low - and our chances of causing such a severe
setback that nobody could follow in our footsteps is lower still.

Widespread use of nuclear weapons would merely delay the inevitable.
-- 
__________
 |im |yler  http://timtyler.org/  tim{at}tt1lock.org  Remove lock to reply.
---
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 7/1/04 1:31:34 PM