|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Behold the Homind | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Yaro Member (Idle past 6523 days) Posts: 1797 Joined: |
Margulies makes it eerely seem as if bacteria have evolved us as a sort of bio suit
A little portable eco system that supplies food for a teaming mass of microbs. She has a chapter devoted to it. It's pretty great stuff.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Nighttrain Member (Idle past 4021 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: |
Ta, Yaro, I`ll order a copy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ausar_maat Member (Idle past 5526 days) Posts: 136 From: Toronto Joined: |
I will too, sounds like a great reading
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Nighttrain Member (Idle past 4021 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: |
Hi, Yaro, got my book and it`s a great read. Wonder if some of the conclusions are dated as it was printed in 1986?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Yaro Member (Idle past 6523 days) Posts: 1797 Joined: |
ya. I read an updated review commenting on some things. I belive the first printing was in '86, but it was updated in '97. My version says '97.
ABE: I belive alot of what lynn margulis put's forward in this book has become mainstream theory. I'll let ya know. ABE2: The wiki had a good little blurb on her:
Lynn Margulis (born 1938) is a biologist and a professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. In 1967 she proposed a contentious new hypothesis which became her most important scientific contribution as the endosymbiotic theory of the origin of mitochondria as separate organisms that long ago entered a symbiotic relationship with eukaryotic cells through endosymbiosis. "She is best known for her theory of symbiogenesis, which challenges a central tenet of neodarwinism. She argues that inherited variation, significant in evolution, does not come mainly from random mutations. Rather new tissues, organs, and even new species evolve primarily through the long-lasting intimacy of strangers. The fusion of genomes in symbioses followed by natural selection, she suggests, leads to increasingly complex levels of individuality." [1] "After the proposal of the endosymbiotic theory, Margulis predicted that if organelles were prokaryotic symbionts, then the organelles will have their own DNA that would be different from the DNA of the cell. This prediction was actually proven in the 1980's in mitochondria, centrioles, and chloroplasts." [2] She was criticized as a radical and her scientific work was rejected by mainstream biology for many years. Her work has more recently received widespread support and acclaim. Prominent evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins recently said that her theory that the eukaryotic cell is a symbiotic union of primitive prokaryotic cells "is one of the great achievements of twentieth-century evolutionary biology, and I greatly admire her for it." Margulis was inducted into the World Academy of Art and Science, the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences between 1995 and 1998. She is also a proponent and co-developer of the modern version of Gaia theory, based on an idea developed by the English atmospheric scientist James Lovelock. She was the first wife of astronomer Carl Sagan and is the mother of Dorion Sagan, popular science writer and co-author, Jeremy Sagan, software developer and founder of Sagan Technology, Zachary Margulis, lawyer and Jennifer Margulis, teacher and author. This message has been edited by Yaro, 10-30-2005 08:25 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Nighttrain Member (Idle past 4021 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: |
I`ve got the Gaia series and Dorion Sagan`s'Biospheres'. Didn`t realise he is the son Of Lynn.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
Message 60 seemed to be marginly on topic, but it has triggered a series of messages that are not on topic.
The mutant theme seems worthy of a new topic of its own. Adminnemooseus New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.
Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures Thread Reopen Requests Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum Other useful links:
Forum Guidelines, Style Guides for EvC and Assistance w/ Forum Formatting |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3990 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
nwr writes: My point is that intelligence is mainly a social adaptation. We use our intelligence most importantly for social interactions. That our intelligence is greater than that of other social species, is related to the complexity of our social interactions being greater than with other social species. Sure, we also use intelligence to explore space, design aircraft, etc. But our ability to use intelligence in that way is mainly a side effect of a social adaptation. Hi, nwr. The above analysis seems circular: aren't our social interactions more complex in large part because of our intelligence? Our social adaptations and intelligence are surely intimately linked, but are you suggesting that social adaptation alone drove the evolution of our intelligence? Please note the question marks--they are genuine.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 4.5 |
The above analysis seems circular: aren't our social interactions more complex in large part because of our intelligence?
I don't think there is a circularity problem. You can sometimes describe the same events in different ways, as in the chicken-egg riddle.
Our social adaptations and intelligence are surely intimately linked, but are you suggesting that social adaptation alone drove the evolution of our intelligence?
Yes, that is precisely what I am suggesting. It's opinion, of course. The last time I checked, fossils didn't come with IQ reports. I can readily see how there could be selection for social cohesion. I find it hard to come up with a scenario where there could be selection for intelligence. It is often remarked that the most intelligent produce less children than average. I cannot prove that this was always so, but I do suspect that. The most intelligent are often social misfits.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1432 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
I find it hard to come up with a scenario where there could be selection for intelligence. Try selection for creativity. Specifically creativity displayed as part of mating behavior. Song, Dance, Art. Why are rock and movie stars perceived as desirable mates? Why was an old fat bald Picasso considered sexy? Creativity then drives {intelligence} as a cofactor to being more creative, but there is no direct link between IQ and creativity. by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 4.5 |
Try selection for creativity.
I pretty much agree with that. It's one of the things I would expect to contribute to social cohesion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Clive Inactive Member |
No, Trotman emphatically does not believe in alien visitors, and "The Feathered Onion" dismisses them.
I should know!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminJar Inactive Member |
We're glad you decided to join us. Pull up a stump and set a spell.
At the end of this message you'll find links to some threads that might help make your stay here more enjoyable. Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024