> in article bdqgil$f41$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org, Stephen Harris at
> stephen.p.harris{at}worldnet.att.net wrote on 6/30/03 4:19 PM:
>
> > It is quite logical to assert that the mechanism of genetic drift
> > which can be called chaotic causation happened first but was
> > discovered later. How could the mechanism of natural selection
> > take action without chaotic causation? It is reasonable to conclude
> > that genetic drift is the logical parent of natural selection. And that
> > the idea that chaotic confusion as a concept should be subsumed
> > under the natural selection concept because natural selection was
> > postulated first is as unreasonable as postulating that relativity
theory
> > should be subsumed under classical theory because it was discovered
> > first. It isn't. The idea of self-organization arising from chaos
meaning
> > that self-organization should be considered the parent concept of
> > chaos doesn't make sense to me. That our understanding should
> > reflect our best knowledge of reality rather than be prioritized by
> > the order of discovery seems a better criteria. The idea that
> > natural selection causes or is responsible for the existence of
> > chaotic causation (randomness/chance) will likely find little support,
> > nor will the idea that history should dictate the classification.
> >
> > I think recognizing that the universe did not start out as a
> > predictable phenomenon but became organized as it evolved
> > establishes seperate principles. Chaos and pattern can coexist
> > in the universe just as genetic drift and natural selection can
> > coexist as part of a larger concept, evolution.

Hence it is far from inept to reason (with variable resolutions/specificity)
in terms of evolutionary "opportunity" and "adversity",
type pressures. And
to try to maintain a realistically multi-faceted focus on
different types (with examples), and the significance of the (likewise
realistic) simultaneity, of evolutionary pressures.

It is not particularly worthwhile to *get stuck* on the mere fact of basic
bioevolutionary variability. Better to be preoccupied with "the
signal" than
with "the noise" (metaphor stolen from John Wilkins); this even if it may
have produced some phylogenetically preserved patterns of significant
phenotypic 'imperfection' -- such as the blind-spot in the retina might be
an example of (?).

P
---
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 7/10/03 12:37:48 PM