"Is 'genetic determinism' empirically valid, and is it essential to the "Modern Synth

Hi Elmer,I like your OP question all right, but are you aware of the "for-the-good-of-the-species" fallacy?”HM

Hi Elmer,Here’s one statement against the “for-the-good-of-the-species” concept: Why are adaptations not for the good of the species?

quote:

---

Adaptations evolve through the differential reproduction of alternative alleles within a population or species. Thus, organisms acquire properties which allow them to out-reproduce members of their own species, not members of other species. It is theoretically possible for the differential survival of gene pools (species) to result in the evolution of organism features which would promote species survival at a personal reproductive cost to individual members of the species; it is extremely unlikely, however, that this process is responsible for the incredible array of complex functionality evinced by sexually reproducing, diploid species (Williams 1966). The length of time between speciation or extinction events is vastly longer than the length of time between generations. Consequently, differential reproduction of alleles within species can produce complex functionality much faster than can differential reproduction between species. An allele that provided a benefit to the species at an expense to the individual would be driven to extinction long before it could have a measurably positive impact on the survival of the species. (There are other forms of group selection, however, that are worth considering; see, e.g., Sober and Wilson Unto Others).
  —Edward H. Hagen

---

This seems relevant to your OP question because it pertains to cause and effect. And, wrt, don't you suppose that a "cause" and a "facilitation" are conflations of each other? When a single gene can alter a mouse's natural fear of cats, for example, did that gene "cause" the change or "facilitate" it. Does a sperm "cause" a woman to become pregnant or does it only "facilitate" it?”HM

Boy, do I agree with you, Elmer! And, yet, what an impossible question it is”this question of driving forces and mechanisms. Elmer, I think he's refuting species survivalism. In a biological world where cause and effect are organically blurred, digital genetic determinism is one of the precious few options we have to consider on a cause-and-effect basis. Otherwise it's either the woo-woos of trait "plasticity" or the raw gears of chemistry that randomly make humans out of apes and eukaryotes out of prokaryotes.But I have to say that your kind of questioning is fairly agreeable to my own.”HM