0
   

Is evolution guided by a set of principles/laws?

Forums: Science And Math
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
spidergal
 
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 02:00 am
Is evolution guided by a set of laws/principles or it occurs randomly?

Assume for a while that the Evolution theory is correct (and Intelligent Design in falsehood) and then try answering this.

I think it "is" guided by laws. We all know about the postulates of Lamarck and Darwin. But, recently, I encountered a counter-view to this from a person who stated :

Quote:
If evolution followed any rules/laws new species would never originate. Evolution would become too predictable. It is a random process.



What do you think?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,753 • Replies: 31
No top replies

 
Francis
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 03:11 am
Re: Is evolution guided by a set of principles/laws?
spidergal wrote:
Quote:
If evolution followed any rules/laws new species would never originate. Evolution would become too predictable. It is a random process.


I'm taken aback by people who make such adamant declarations.

Evolution can follow one simple rule : species evolve in order to adapt to their environment. The best fit survive. Does it prevent the generation of new species? I don't think so.
0 Replies
 
spidergal
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 03:18 am
Re: Is evolution guided by a set of principles/laws?
Francis wrote:
spidergal wrote:
Quote:
If evolution followed any rules/laws new species would never originate. Evolution would become too predictable. It is a random process.


I'm taken aback by people who make such adamant declarations.

Evolution can follow one simple rule : species evolve in order to adapt to their environment. The best fit survive. Does it prevent the generation of new species? I don't think so.


Yes, that is what I think. Even speciation is an organised process.
0 Replies
 
kitchenpete
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 03:28 am
Fundamental genetics has certain parameters within which evolution can take place. I suppose you could call them rules or laws, if you like.

Differentiation of "families" or types within a species can then lead to speciation, particularly if there is a dividing factor such as isolation of one group from the others "allopatric speciation".

Richard Dawkins in "The Selfish Gene" and other writing addresses in a much more modern way the ideas which Darwin started. Darwin himself was deeply Christian and did not wish to undermine the principles of that religion, rather to wonder at the manner in which (in his eyes) God had created the world.
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 07:49 am
There is a general principle of evolution.

There are genetic constraints on evolution which you could call laws.

And there are many emergent phenomena in evolution, because like many complex systems when you have some simple rules being applied to a large system small probabilistic events can result in larger changes in the population as a whole.

Speciation is the obvious emergent phenomena here. But there are different ways for this to occur that are not obvious. The most obvious causes are probably geographic separation or social separation...but for instance, my mom is currently doing research showing how it can also occur in unseparated populations.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 07:54 am
1. Those creatures best suited to survive tend statistically to do so more often than creatures less adapted to their environment.

2. From time to time a new trait is introduced into the gene pool by any of various sources of error.
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 11:26 am
Brandon9000 wrote:
1. Those creatures best suited to survive tend statistically to do so more often than creatures less adapted to their environment.

2. From time to time a new trait is introduced into the gene pool by any of various sources of error.


You completely forgot to mention that genes are past on to the next generation, as well as factors that affect who mates with whom. And this is where unexpected things can happen that make it more complicated than it sounds.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 11:47 am
People opposed to the teaching of evolution erroneously criticize evolutionary theory as being dependant on random events.

Professor Elliot Sober of the University of Wisconsin explains that the opposite is true:

Quote:
The process of evolution by natural selection is not a uniform chance process. The process has two parts. Novel traits arise in individual organisms "by chance;" however, whether they then disappear from the population or increase in frequency and eventually reach 100% representation is anything but a "matter of chance." The central idea of natural selection is that traits that help organisms survive and reproduce have a better chance at becoming common than traits that hurt. The essence of natural selection is that evolutionary outcomes have unequal probabilities.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 12:16 pm
David Quammen, a science writer for National Geographic Magazine, gives a very clear explanation of what evolutionary theory states:

Quote:
0 Replies
 
spidergal
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 12:20 pm
Thank you Wandel and others. I'll read the scientist's comments ASAP.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 07:24 pm
Re: Is evolution guided by a set of principles/laws?
spidergal wrote:
Is evolution guided by a set of principles/laws?


Yes. Evolution is guided by the principle of Natural Selection. It is the only guiding factor.

Reproduction (copying) is the foundation.
Variation is the fuel.
Selection is the guide.

Natural Selection is unavoidable and inevitable for any system in which reproduction is disproportionately successful based on the viability of each copy.

There are a myriad of factors which affect variation, but Natural Selection is uniquely different, it is the only non-randomizing factor in the process of evolution.
0 Replies
 
spidergal
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Oct, 2006 04:32 am
Yes, Natural selection. But, don't you think Lamarck's postulates too reflect some truth?
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Oct, 2006 07:09 am
spidergal wrote:
Yes, Natural selection. But, don't you think Lamarck's postulates too reflect some truth?


Lamarck is generally remembered mainly in connection with the discredited theory of "inheritance of acquired traits".

Organisms do not pass on traits which are acquired during their lifetimes, because those traits do not alter the genetic structure of the organism.

Is there some other postulate from Lamarck which you are asking about?
0 Replies
 
Quincy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Oct, 2006 02:11 pm
Wouldn't there be a genetic root for the propensity to acquire new traits, and this would be passed on?
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Oct, 2006 02:28 pm
Quincy wrote:
Wouldn't there be a genetic root for the propensity to acquire new traits, and this would be passed on?


No, there is no mechanism to 'acquire' traits, so there is nothing to pass on.

Once an organism is conceived, it's genetic code is fixed, the code doesn't change.

Because the genetics of an organism do not change, it is impossible to 'acquire' traits in the way Lamarck described (by behaviors or events). For ecample, if an animal looses a leg during its life, it will not produce offspring with a missing leg.
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Oct, 2006 02:37 pm
Quincy wrote:
Wouldn't there be a genetic root for the propensity to acquire new traits, and this would be passed on?


YES, there are genetic factors that affect the mutability of one's genetic code as well as the reliability of the transcription process. These factors have evolved to a local optimum.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Oct, 2006 02:39 pm
stuh505 wrote:
Quincy wrote:
Wouldn't there be a genetic root for the propensity to acquire new traits, and this would be passed on?


YES, there are genetic factors that affect the mutability of one's genetic code as well as the reliability of the transcription process. These factors have evolved to a local optimum.


All of which has nothing to do with acquisition.
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Oct, 2006 03:09 pm
Quote:
All of which has nothing to do with acquisition.


Sure it does. Acquisition of new traits happens during transcription, so it has everything to do with it.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Oct, 2006 03:13 pm
stuh505 wrote:
Quote:
All of which has nothing to do with acquisition.


Sure it does. Acquisition of new traits happens during transcription, so it has everything to do with it.


What kind of acquisition are you talking about?

The question was about acquisition of traits the way Lamarck described it.
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Oct, 2006 03:15 pm
rosborne979 wrote:
No, there is no mechanism to 'acquire' traits, so there is nothing to pass on.

Once an organism is conceived, it's genetic code is fixed, the code doesn't change.


I think it would be possible to be infected by a virus that modified the DNA of reproductive cells
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Which building has the highest load bearing? - Discussion by tali
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter' - Discussion by oralloy
Bizarre Proposal to Increase the Number of Planets - Discussion by oralloy
DDT to Return as Weapon Against Malaria, Experts Say - Discussion by gungasnake
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is evolution guided by a set of principles/laws?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/02/2024 at 04:47:13
▲ ▼