Diversification: Random Walk or Biological Determinism?

It is easy enough for us to see that biological evolution will lead eventually to biological diversification. The most dramatic suggestion of this is the trend of diversification following the Permian Extinction: Some would say, however, that there is no trend toward diversification. Instead, it’s only the mirage of a staggering drunk. Is biological diversification merely the result of the random-walk phenomenon? Or is there something meta-evolutionary about it? Does nature allow for any such determinism as this to foster some undiscovered holist principle?I take notice of the evidence of natural diversification in non-living things as well, like rocks. There are several species of quartz, you know, that have accrued over time. So maybe nature allows for deterministic diversification in all of her domains.Or maybe not? Any thoughts?(Biological Evolution please?)”FTF

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

Steven, I'll take what you say to mean that you think there are meta-Darwinian forces at work to spread the biological news around.”FTF

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

Thanks for joining in, RAZD. That's really the core question of this issue: Is diversification, in and of itself, an emergent property? If so it would seem that such an emergent property could exert pressure on a large biological system, which might be measured over the long term on planet Earth as three families of marine life per one million years (see graph in Message 1).”FTF

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

Is said same diversification a consequence or an emergent property? I like Nosy's "consequence," because diversification happens after evolution occurs, if the environment is adaquently diverse. But, then again, water happens after the oxidation of hydrogen in a certain tempearure range, and it is considered by some chemists and physicists as an emergent property.”FTF

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

Percy,That's probably an acceptable definition for complexity, but it reflects more on the mechanical aspects of the system. If I were to use the term "complexity" in describing a system from information theory's standpoint, I would want to address the "uncertainty" about the system. Complexity, then, becomes a measure of the system's "entropy". In Shannon's theory, "conditional entropy" S (i.e., complexity) is shown as:S = D ” I,where D is the systems "diversity" and I is the systems "average mutual information." (I'd show the equations, but it takes a little trouble”best to consult an information theory textbook or website).I offer this only as an alternative to the mechanical notion of complexity.”FTF

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

Why do you assume that all emergent properties are either mysterious or mystical? Isn't biological life an emergent property of abiotic nature? How did the genes get here if not by way of an emergent property of chemical systems? How did the eukaryotes evolve if not by way of an emergent property of prokaryotes? How did symbolic language arise if not as an emergent property of humans?And the bottom-line question is: Does diversification happen randomly or deterministically? To this question you have answered: "diversity breeds diversity." So, why is that true for biological structures like organisms and not true for physical structures like rocks. I've never seen a population of stones diversify into an interstate highway without human intervention. That happens because of human determinism. Therefore, I would argue that "diversity breeds diversity" is evidence of biological determinism.I get impression that you think biological life emerged on planet Earth by way of reducto ad diversito.”FTF

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

Yes, I can agree with that, more or less. We're talking about the same meaning of "emergent property," I think. Well, just how does your understanding of EP differ from mine? You mentioned Stewart Kauffman in support of your argument. Was he speaking in the colloquial sense when he said (in At Home In The Universe, 1995, p. 45)?:

quote:

---

There are compelling reasons to believe that whenever a collection of chemicals contains enough different kinds of molecules, a metabolism will crystalize from the broth. If this argument is correct, metabolic networks need not be built one component at a time; they can spring full-grown from a primordial soup. Order for free, I call it. If I am right, the motto of life is not We the improbably, but We the expected.

---

To me, Kauffan's statment is one place you can go to find mystery and mysticism. (I'd never say anything as reckless as that, and I've been known to say reckless things.) Is biological diversification like erosion? If so, then it would be a random walk. If not, it would have to be either fundamentally deterministic or an emergent property, or both.”FTFEdited by Fosdick The Fearless, : tidy, tidy

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

I think this is fundamental to the Gaiaist philosophy.”FTF

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

Ah, I didn't know there was one”the orange one. If natural selection is deterministic then you are saying that a population is predisposed one way or another to "differential reproductive success amongst individuals across the population" (E. O. Wilson et al.) THAT is all that NS really is. It's not some Selector who is out to pick His favorites. Perhaps you are a closet Creatin (just kidding). But that is not really what determinism is. What you are speaking of is only mechanical, like a river carving out a gorge. The river has no determinism to do that, and neither does gravity.”FTF

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

A very good question. I've heard people out here speak of the Columbia River gorge as the work of God, which might qualify it as an emergent property. That would be a act of Divine Hydraulics. But I personally don't think so. Mechanical things like that don't need to be glorified. When a rock falls to ground and leaves a divot, I don't think that divot is an EP.”FTF

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

So, CS, should I put you down as one who thinks biological diversification is a random walk?”FTF

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

Works for me. It's all in the attitude: I win when I win and I win when I fall.”FTF

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.

I have to agree with Dawkins that selfish gene activities like replication and propagation (usually via fertilization) are deterministic. Genes are nothing if not determined to survive. They may be the most deterministic things in nature. If diversification is be proven to be a deterministic act of genes”i.e., a "tool" for their survival”then I think diversification is a form of biological determinism. But I'm not sure diversification is always beneficial to the genes. I could see arguments on both side of the issue. Do you consider the diversification of cracks in drying mud a deterministic act? Is there's a difference between mechanical diversification and deterministic diversification? I think so.”FTF

---

I can see Lower Slobovia from my house.