Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9073 total)
63 online now:
Tangle (1 member, 62 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,320 Year: 4,432/6,534 Month: 646/900 Week: 170/182 Day: 3/47 Hour: 0/1

Announcements: Security Update Released


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   About New Lamarckian Synthesis Theory
nwr
Member
Posts: 5974
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 7 of 264 (674583)
09-30-2012 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by zi ko
09-28-2012 9:22 AM


zi ko writes:
Why evolutionists are not willing to discuss Lamarckian scenario in evolution?

Perhaps because there isn't a lot of evidence for it.

zi ko writes:
In Wikipedia we read:

“Epigenetic inheritance
...
… its significance to the evolutionary process is uncertain.”


That sounds about right. ID people argue for it from time to time, but usually without significant evidence.

I would think you would be more likely to find something a bit Lamarckian resulting from the Baldwin effect than from epigenetic inheritance.


Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by zi ko, posted 09-28-2012 9:22 AM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by zi ko, posted 10-01-2012 6:52 AM nwr has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5974
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 11 of 264 (674624)
10-01-2012 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by zi ko
10-01-2012 6:52 AM


The Baldwin effect it is another argument for guided mutations and against randomness.

No, it isn't.

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by zi ko, posted 10-01-2012 6:52 AM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by zi ko, posted 10-01-2012 11:27 AM nwr has replied
 Message 13 by Percy, posted 10-01-2012 11:39 AM nwr has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5974
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 20 of 264 (674678)
10-01-2012 2:46 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Percy
10-01-2012 11:39 AM


I think the way Zi Ko is looking at this is that if a behavior can be considered an acquired characteristic, then if that behavior is heritable it could be considered Lamarckian because it would be a heritable acquired characteristic, and it could be considered guided by the environment because the environment could have trained in the behavior, either naturally in the wild or experimentally through laboratory training, or through a classroom, and just through normal day-to-day activities.

Well, fair enough. However, it is not the specific mutation that is guided, and that's what zi ko is getting wrong.

One could say that there is guidance toward mutations that support the particular behavior, and fair enough on that, too. The tradition view would be to call that filtering by natural selection, rather than guidance. If zi ko is trying to make a case against the Darwinian account, then he needs to do better than that.


Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Percy, posted 10-01-2012 11:39 AM Percy has seen this message

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5974
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 21 of 264 (674681)
10-01-2012 2:50 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by zi ko
10-01-2012 11:27 AM


nwr writes:
No, it isn't.
zi ko writes:
Can you or anny body else prove this assertion?

What's to prove?

The Baldwin effect is fully accounted for by standard Darwinian theory, as explained in the Wikipedia page that I linked to.


Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by zi ko, posted 10-01-2012 11:27 AM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by zi ko, posted 10-02-2012 3:24 AM nwr has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5974
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 31 of 264 (674733)
10-02-2012 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by zi ko
10-02-2012 3:24 AM


zi ko writes:
1. Environmental information can result deep genome changes.

This has never been controversial. Normally, natural selection is given as the means by which the environment affects the genome.

zi ko writes:
2. The Selection mechanism is present.

Again, this is well accepted.

zi ko writes:
3. There was for some time a wrinkle in orthodox Darvinism.

Was there?

You are attributing this idea of a wrinkle to Dennett, who I would describe as a pan-selectionist. There have always been critics of the pan-selectionist view, with Gould as perhaps the best known.


Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by zi ko, posted 10-02-2012 3:24 AM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by zi ko, posted 10-06-2012 12:05 PM nwr has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5974
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 48 of 264 (675134)
10-06-2012 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by zi ko
10-06-2012 12:05 PM


No, I mean direct environmental effect on deep DNA.

When people use "deep" like that, I tend to take them as signalling that they don't know what they are talking about but want to sound impressive.

"The stress of fear, lack of food, lack of mating opportunities etc., are the main causes of soft or deep changes. As these stresses are empathetically transmitted not only to life peers, but to extant population in wild areas, and to proximal generations , the resultant beneficial mutations are fairly quickly established, reducing the time needed by natural selection to do its work. This long time effect is the main cause of speciation as it expresses deep survival needs."

Much of that might be correct. But that is what I would call "environmental". The biochemical environment has changed, which has effects on development.

Personally, I have been a critic of biological determinism. There's nothing in that Time article (thanks for the link, Percy) that particularly surprises me. However, to make a case of Lamarckian inheritance, you would really need to see these effects transmitted to many generations, not only to the immediate next generation.

There's another effect that I didn't see in that Time report (or perhaps I missed it). Namely that some of these stress conditions are known to increase mutation rates, which can affect the rapidity of evolution.


Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by zi ko, posted 10-06-2012 12:05 PM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by zi ko, posted 10-10-2012 11:47 AM nwr has seen this message

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5974
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 143 of 264 (676373)
10-22-2012 1:23 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by Larni
10-22-2012 12:47 PM


If all the participants and lurkers could find their way to my first post in this thread I will humbly claim victory.

Yes, you nailed it from the start.

For those wanting to check, it is Message 10


Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by Larni, posted 10-22-2012 12:47 PM Larni has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022