|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,766 Year: 4,023/9,624 Month: 894/974 Week: 221/286 Day: 28/109 Hour: 1/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Definition for the Theory of Evolution | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
In the Basic Fundamentals of THE Debate (now open to anyone) we seem to have reached an impasse on what the definition for the theory of evolution is. The two basic opinions are:
(1) RAZD Evolution is the (hereditary) change in species over time. This is viewed as being essentially the same as "descent with modification" and "the change in frequency of alleles in populations" and is supported by (among others) the Forum Definition and Berkley University definition. (2) Murkywaters
Message 87 The theory of evolution, on the other hand, can be stated as “All the living forms in the world have arisen over billions of years from a single common ancestor which itself came from an inorganic form.” This can be equated with the commonly used terms “macroevolution” (used by evolutionist) or simply “theory of evolution” (used by creationists). For which there is apparently no specific cite for a basis that I can find.The questions are: (A) which is the better definition from a the standpoint of the science of evolution, (B) what are the failings of each definition, and (C) what is your personally preferred (concise) definition. Thanks. Biological Evolution Forum please. Edited by RAZD, : brevity and clarity, subtitle compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click) we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNem Inactive Member |
Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
which is the better definition from a the standpoint of the science of evolution, Definition 1
what are the failings of each definition, and The first is a general overview of evolution, and the latter is a specific overview (ie, natural history). Neither is a definition of the theory of evolution.
what is your personally preferred (concise) definition. The theory of evolution is a collection of mechanisms that describe how hereditary change in species over time happens.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1280 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
Murkywaters's definition is incorrect based on things that it includes that are not necessary to the ToE as well as what he doesn't include.
He gives no description whatsoever of how the various organisms arose from a single common ancestor. RAZD's definition, however, at least explains something about how the process occurred, "the change in frequency of alleles in popluations." Murky's definition includes two elements that are not necessary components of or conditions for the ToE; a common ancestor, and an inorganic beginning. I'm not aware of anything in the ToE that rules out the possibility of more than one instance of life arising. Nor am I aware of anything the the ToE that rules out the possiblity of an extra terrestrial origin for the "seeds of life" which then grew and florished on this planet. While I do not believe that either of these ideas are commonly accepted as the most probable explanations, if evidence of either them were found, the ToE would be able to accomodate that evidence without any significant changes. The only nit that I would pick with RAZD's definition is that it does not clearly lay out the process by which descent with modification takes place. As stated, it could encompass either Darwinian or Lamarkian change. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1280 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
The theory of evolution is a collection of mechanisms that describe how hereditary change in species over time happens. I would say that's a description, not a definition. Here's my shot at it. Populations change over time, mostly due to selective pressures to which the populations are subject, which enable those offspring better adapted to the environment to reproduce at a higher rate than those which are not. This change occurs because those organisms that are better adapted tend to pass on more of their genetic make up to the next generation. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Populations change over time, mostly due to selective pressures to which the populations are subject, which enable those offspring better adapted to the environment to reproduce at a higher rate than those which are not. This change occurs because those organisms that are better adapted tend to pass on more of their genetic make up to the next generation. Now that is a description of the theory, perhaps even an overview of the theory. You start your definition with a fact, and then go on to describe one factor which can cause the fact. I don't think it is possible to 'define' a theory. However it is possible to define the term 'The Theory of Evolution'. A definition should really be able to be tacked on to the prefix 'The theory of evolution is...'. As to the question, 'what are these mechanisms that the theory describes?' we might turn to something like your description. We know that there are several mechanisms, selection being the one you focussed on and of course there is hereditary variation, neutral drift and epigenetics etc. My concise statement tells you what the theory of evolution is, not what the mechanisms are, not how they operate or how they cause change...just a definition of The theory of Evolution Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1280 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
Well, let's see if we can't hone in on the guts of the topic without getting bogged down in semantics.
It seems to me that any definition or description of the ToE should be comprehensive enough to rule out alternative theories about how descent with modification may occur. In addition, it should not include things that are not part of the theory that someone might try to graft onto it in an effort to undermine it. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
The first is a general overview of evolution, and the latter is a specific overview (ie, natural history). Neither is a definition of the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution is a collection of mechanisms that describe how hereditary change in species over time happens. In other words you want a set of mechanisms to say how evolution occurs referenced in the definition.
quote: Would that help? (those were my stipulations for microevolution). Thanks. compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click) we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
How about something like:
The theory of evolution is Life changes over time, due to hereditary mutations, natural selection, population dynamics, genetic drift and horizontal gene transfer by viruses and the like. Thanks. compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click) we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1280 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
I think that's incomplete without including that some changes confer survival advantages on some organisms because of environmental pressures and that those organisms better adapted tend to prosper at the expense of those less well-adapted.
Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Well, let's see if we can't hone in on the guts of the topic without getting bogged down in semantics. Hehehe, a discussion on definitions getting bogged down by the meaning of words?
It seems to me that any definition or description of the ToE should be comprehensive enough to rule out alternative theories about how descent with modification may occur. In addition, it should not include things that are not part of the theory that someone might try to graft onto it in an effort to undermine it. Yes - if we were going to describe the theory of evolution that is currently accepted by a consensus of those that study it - but such a thing is difficult to do concisely. If we are to give it a name it would probably be 'The Synthetic Theory of Evolution'. It is a synthesis of a number of theories, such as Darwinism and Mendelian genetics as well as more modern theories stemming from our understanding of genetics. I suppose you could define the synthetic theory like this site does:
quote: Or this one:
quote: Trying to include all of the mechanisms into the definition will fall foul of the original parameter by being necessarily verbose. Probably the size of a book or more likely several hundred books - just see how wordy Gould got in his 'The Structure of Evolutionary Theory'
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
In other words you want a set of mechanisms to say how evolution occurs referenced in the definition. Quite the contrary, I don't think it is possible, not without losing the concise edge. If I am going to describe the theory of evolution I would say it includes natural selection, hereditary variation, neutral drift and epigenetics to name a few but I would be more keen to draw a line between the phenomenon and the theory that explains the phenomenon. What is the theory of evolution? It is the theory that explains the phenomenon of evolution. It is a body of knowledge of hypotheses and theories that, when combined help explain all the ways we know how population changes can occur under certain circumstances. Those circumstances are present in life and so the theory can help explain the evolution of biological life. Some examples of these sub-theories include the process of natural selection acting on hereditary variations, neutral genetic drift, recombination of recessive and dominant traits and so on and so forth.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
I think that's incomplete without including that some changes confer survival advantages on some organisms because of environmental pressures and that those organisms better adapted tend to prosper at the expense of those less well-adapted. Realising that this might be going down the route of pedantic semantics, but you've just described in more detail one item on RAZD's list: natural selection.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1280 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
Yes, you're quite right.
My bad. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Grizz Member (Idle past 5497 days) Posts: 318 Joined: |
I would vote for the forum defintion.
For an operational definition of what an evolutionary scientist does I would say: A study of natural mechanisms that can lead to changes in a genome over time.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024