Evolution #9

[RJT]

I assume most folk here (especially most atheist) believe in evolution. I think (from the little I know about it) the theory is a good one (and not incompatible with Christianity, btw).

My questions have nothing to do with religion (indirectly I guess they do, but not my main reason for asking).

1) Why have we evolved into our present state - I.e. self-awareness, state of our intellect, emotional beings - as opposed to for example, strictly intellectual beings with no emotion?

2) Are we evolving on the right path? Or somewhere along the line did we take a wrong turn and now, because we are capable of surviving for who knows how long, we can’t get on the path that might have been a better one?

3) If we took a wrong path, can we find evidence of one that could have been better for us?

4) If we took the wrong path and can’t get back on one that would have been better - would it be better for humans to become extinct, so that a more correct evolutionary path get going?

5) If evolution is a river that we cannot divert, why is that? I am thinking more in terms of intellectually diverting evolution rather than through genetics, but not excluding genetics.

6) If we can direct our own evolution, how can we?

7) What are some ideas of what we are evolving into?

If these are all basic questions regarding evolution, let me know and I will do more research myself. The little I know about it has never talked much about the intellect relative to evolution and possible self directing (as a species, not individually) evolution.

[Zeiros]

[ QUOTE ]
I assume most folk here (especially most atheist) believe in evolution. I think (from the little I know about it) the theory is a good one (and not incompatible with Christianity, btw).

My questions have nothing to do with religion (indirectly I guess they do, but not my main reason for asking).


1) Why have we evolved into our present state - I.e. self-awareness, state of our intellect, emotional beings - as opposed to for example, strictly intellectual beings with no emotion?


[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

2) Are we evolving on the right path? Or somewhere along the line did we take a wrong turn and now, because we are capable of surviving for who knows how long, we can’t get on the path that might have been a better one?


[/ QUOTE ]

There is no such thing as the 'right' path with evolution. It is nothing more than natural selection.

As a very artificial example imagine a cave full off two species. Owls and mice. The owls eat the mice to live, the mice try to hide from the owls to survive. Over many years, the mice that blend most closely to the colour of the floor will be most likely to survive and reproduce and so most mice will gradually change to become the same colour as the cave. If, one day, the cave were to spontaneously change colour then over the next few million years the mice would begin to change colour again to match the new cave.

A contrived example I know, but it serves to illustrate a point. Natural selection is a blind force that acts in the direction of what is beneficial at the current time. Of course, if evolution were guided or premeditated then we would probably work in a much more efficient way than we do now. We would be sleek, streamlined and efficient. As it happens animals are pretty unwieldy creatures. Just look at the appendix in humans, hip bones in whales, wings on the ostrich, the lists of useless bits in animals go on and on.

Evolution is a messy process, it often leaves marks of adaptations and failures, but it always produces animals that can survive as best as possible in the prevailing conditions.

[ QUOTE ]

3) If we took a wrong path, can we find evidence of one that could have been better for us?


[/ QUOTE ]

See answer to number two.

[ QUOTE ]

4) If we took the wrong path and can’t get back on one that would have been better - would it be better for humans to become extinct, so that a more correct evolutionary path get going?


[/ QUOTE ]

See answer to number three.


[ QUOTE ]

5) If evolution is a river that we cannot divert, why is that? I am thinking more in terms of intellectually diverting evolution rather than through genetics, but not excluding genetics.


[/ QUOTE ]

We can divert evolution rather easily. Selective breeding.

Let me illustrate with another artificial example. I have a field full of cows. I want to sell the cows to be slaughtered for food. For this reason I make a point of picking the biggest bull every year and breeding him with all of the females. If I repeat this process over many years, never mixing in any other cattle, my cows will get bigger and bigger. If we repeat this for a few thousand years I'll end up with super-massive cows that look so different from every other cow on the planet that they will be classed as their own species.

Anything that acts to change which members of a species reproduce influences evolution.

[ QUOTE ]

6) If we can direct our own evolution, how can we?


[/ QUOTE ]

See answer to number five. Google the word eugenics to find people who have thought of the human species in this way.

[ QUOTE ]

7) What are some ideas of what we are evolving into?


[/ QUOTE ]

Looking at the world today, I really don't know. Natural selection drives animals that survive most efficiently to reproduce more.

A human society faces selection effects that are vastly different to those ever seen before in the history of the Earth.

You no longer need to be strong and able to fend for yourself in the wilderness to survive. You no longer need to have four fully working limbs to reproduce and survive. You no longer need to even be mentally competitive to reproduce.

Civilization has changed evolutionary pressures greatly, and I'd like to know what is coming next!

[FlFishOn]

"2) Are we evolving on the right path? "

For all practical purposes human evolution has ended. The unfit freely contribute their genes to the pool. The most fit seem to have no reproductive advantage, in fact in western society the most fit tend to reproduce at the lowest rates. Perhaps that's evolution after all, just not forward going.

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
"2) Are we evolving on the right path? "

For all practical purposes human evolution has ended. The unfit freely contribute their genes to the pool. The most fit seem to have no reproductive advantage, in fact in western society the most fit tend to reproduce at the lowest rates. Perhaps that's evolution after all, just not forward going.

[/ QUOTE ]

evolutionary fitness is not the same as your personal view of the most fit.

chez

[Zeiros]

[ QUOTE ]
"2) Are we evolving on the right path? "

For all practical purposes human evolution has ended. The unfit freely contribute their genes to the pool. The most fit seem to have no reproductive advantage, in fact in western society the most fit tend to reproduce at the lowest rates. Perhaps that's evolution after all, just not forward going.

[/ QUOTE ]

I kind of hinted at this point in a roundabout way in my first post, and it is somewhat worrying.

I guess the way I look at this is that we have removed the traditional evolutionary pressures (being fit, being clever, being cunning, etc.) and replaced them with something else.

On the surface it is a pretty depressing thought; how will humanity ever move forward without this powerful, selective force pushing it. Either we will stagnate and regress or the forces will come from somewhere else. Somewhat surprisingly, a journalist at MSNBC wrote a story about this very subject that is both thoughtful and insightful (here). The short of it is that already in the present day we are beginning to be moulded by technology and this process will continue.

Naturally some of the ideas in the article sound like scienmce fiction but both nature and humanity are very resourceful, so lets just wait and see what happens.

Well, we'll all be dead and buried by then, but let's just imagine we can wait and see what happens...

[RJT]

I understood evolution to be basically about natural selection, like you all have said. I guess I assumed (hoped) there was more to it.

If it is only that, then since we have evolved into beings that basically have the ability to survive viz a viz other predatory species then why aren’t we done evolving? I understand evolution to be a never ending process. In fact just this evening on the news, scientists at the U of Chicago (fairly sure it was there) think the human brains are still evolving. If we are still evolving then for what reason? Seems we haven't stopped evolving.

Besides, I find it hard to believe that human evolution has ended. How can it just stop after billions of years?

Also, why did we evolve into being with emotions?

I will do your recommended google search, but really I was thinking more in terms of steering evolution through thought process.

Btw, way I guess I used the wrong word - I didn’t mean the right path, so much as a different and perhaps better path.

Thanks for you post.

[RJT]

“Well, we'll all be dead and buried by then, but let's just imagine we can wait and see what happens... “

That’s one of the nice thing about believing in an afterlife - I will be able to see what happens. Joking of course about “seeing” what happens.

[Zeiros]

[ QUOTE ]
I understood evolution to be basically about natural selection, like you all have said. I guess I assumed (hoped) there was more to it.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'll make one slightly offtopic point here. Why did you hope that there was more to evolution than natural selection?

It seems to me to be an incredibly satisfying picture of the Universe that this one, incredibly simple principle -- 'Natural Selection' -- can give rise to humans, jellyfish, venus flytraps, clams and the rest of the weird and amazing life that exists in the Universe.

The Universe is seriously pretty damn cool.

[ QUOTE ]

If it is only that, then since we have evolved into beings that basically have the ability to survive viz a viz other predatory species then why aren’t we done evolving?


[/ QUOTE ]

The tiger on the African plains has no predators but it still evolves. Why? (two reasons: its prey keeps evolving so it must keep up, also it is in competition with other tigers)

[ QUOTE ]


I understand evolution to be a never ending process. In fact just this evening on the news, scientists at the U of Chicago (fairly sure it was there) think the human brains are still evolving. If we are still evolving then for what reason? Seems we haven't stopped evolving.


[/ QUOTE ]

See answer to last question. Also you ask for a 'reason' that we are still evolving. Natural selection doesn't need a reason, it can never stop. The fittest will always survive.

[ QUOTE ]

Besides, I find it hard to believe that human evolution has ended. How can it just stop after billions of years?


[/ QUOTE ]

It hasn't....

[ QUOTE ]

Also, why did we evolve into being with emotions?


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know. This is a question that a lot of researchers thing deeply about today and nobody knows the definitive answer to.

[ QUOTE ]

I will do your recommended google search, but really I was thinking more in terms of steering evolution through thought process.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really understand what you mean by 'steering evolution through thought process'

[Piers]

[ QUOTE ]
Why have we evolved into our present state - I.e. self-awareness, state of our intellect, emotional beings - as opposed to for example, strictly intellectual beings with no emotion?

[/ QUOTE ]

Emotion is the main motive force for higher live on Earth. If we did not have emotions we would never do anything. We could not have evolved without emotion.

[ QUOTE ]
Are we evolving on the right path? Or somewhere along the line did we take a wrong turn and now, because we are capable of surviving for who knows how long, we can’t get on the path that might have been a better one?

[/ QUOTE ]

What ever do you mean by ‘right path’. What do you man by ‘better path’. Who decides what a wrong turn is?

[ QUOTE ]
If we took a wrong path, can we find evidence of one that could have been better for us?

[/ QUOTE ]

There you go again, being on the wrong path implies that there was a right path. What’s with this path thing? Evolution is blind. There is no right or wrong path, just what happens.

[ QUOTE ]
If we took the wrong path and can’t get back on one that would have been better - would it be better for humans to become extinct, so that a more correct evolutionary path get going?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who’s right? Who’s wrong? Whose path? I see no bases for these concepts.

[ QUOTE ]
If evolution is a river that we cannot divert, why is that? I am thinking more in terms of intellectually diverting evolution rather than through genetics, but not excluding genetics. If we can direct our own evolution, how can we?

[/ QUOTE ]

Divert?

Maybe we cannot ‘divert’ our evolution because we are inside the system. Positive feedback in the form of the subject species using technology and understanding to deliberately modify itself is just another stage in the evolutionary process. Real change would have to come from outside the system.

What level are we thinking on? Is there something you want to, or would have changed?

Most of the questions you have asked show that you have a misconception about evolution which most people share. I am writing a thesis on evolutionary biology at the moment, and I have learned alot about evolutionary processes.

The most common misconception about evolution is one which you have expressed in most of your questions, namely that evolution has a defined path or a final goal. This is not the case. Evolution is a result of isolated genetic differences which occur in specific organisms and prove advantageous to the survival of the organism as a whole. For example, we have evolved to have eyelids because at some stage in our development there was a genetic anomaly which resulted in our ancestors having eyelids. These then proved to be advantageous to our ancestors in terms of survival and so those ancestors of ours with eyelids became more prominent than those without until eventually the only humans (or whatever we were at that stage) that were left were the descendants of the first ones with eyelids. This process is known as adaptation. There are some arguments which suggest that this is maybe not the only process which dictates our evolution (see Gould & Lewontin) but for the most part evolutionary biologists agree that this is the most common process in evolution. Richard Dawkins is a very well known supporter of this thesis and he has some very interesting books and theories on it.

So there is no set path, or evolutionary plan, evolution is a result of completely random genetic anomalies. There is no 'evolutionary brain' forecasting what processes must take place for our bodies as a whole to develop in a certain way, but rather our evolution is a result of individual traits adapting and proving to be more advantageous to us than the previous trait. This also debunks the common myth about evolution which suggests that we are headed towards absolute perfection. There is no such thing.

Our future evolution will be as a result of the adaptive processes just discussed, and not as a result of some predetermined path or goal. We can never know what we will become or turn into because we do not know what sort of genetic anomalies will occur.

The general consensus at the moment is that evolution in humans at least has slowed down considerably as a result of much larger gene pools when compared with the past. The adaptive process is not nearly as prevalent in large gene pools as in small ones as even if some genetic anomaly does confer an advantage to the individual in terms of survival, this anomaly might not be prevalent in enough people to break a trend in the gene pool and become a feature of everybody, more than likely it will get passed on to a few people but will eventually get swamped and will die out.

Hopefully this has gone some way to answering your questions, if you have any more just ask.