Re: Perpetually Perplexed

From: Jim McGinn (jimmcginn_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 01/21/05 

Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 13:43:58 -0500 (EST)

Perplexed in Peoria wrote:
> "Joe Felsenstein" <joe@removethispart.gs.washington.edu> wrote in
message news:csormk$g3t$1@darwin.ediacara.org...
> > In article <cs3lf4$17b$1@darwin.ediacara.org>,
> > Jim McGinn <jimmcginn@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >1) Explain the logic/rationality of the
> > >neoDarwinistic assumption of absolute discreteness
> > >in fitness accounting between lifeform's (ie. c
> > >and b in Hamilton's equation).
> > >
> > >(To, possibly, help you understand what I mean
> > >by this, I would argue the opposite position in
> > >any such continued discussion. I'd argue for
> > >the assumption(s) of RELATIVE discreteness
> > >in fitness accounting between lifeforms [ie. c
> > >and b in Hamilton's equation].)
> >
> > I could explain this if I had the slightest idea
> > what McGinn was talking about (even after the
> > extra explanation above).
>
> Conjecture: McGinn may be worried about the "discreteness"
> of classical Mendelian genetics. A finite number of
> phenotypes determined by a finite number of genotypes.

No, you've completely got the wrong idea. I'm concerned about the
discreteness of fitness accounting, as I stated.

> Or perhaps, by the derived idea that an allele has
> a fitness that is different (by a discrete amount)
> from the fitness of another allele. Someone or other,
> during the sociobiology dispute, made a big deal over
> whether averages have ontological significance. An
> allele fitness is, after all, an average of the fitnesses
> increments that the allele provides in each organism
> that carries it. Certainly not an elementary concept.
> Edser, for example, seems to have difficulty with it.
>
> [snip]
> > Perhaps there are some other "assumptions" that we are all
> > making that McGinn will also dispute. This is unclear.
>
> The assumption that genes exist and are important?

Fitness accounting is potentially a very complicated subject. I'm not
sure that you all are ready to discuss it.

Jim

Relevant Pages

  • Re: "crime gene"-was it founs??
    ... fitness altruism) only allows just a SINGLE allele ... assumed to be coded by just one allele. ... to satisfy the rule as epistasis e, ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Perpetually Perplexed
    ... >>neoDarwinistic assumption of absolute discreteness ... > other phenotype) that affects both its fitness and the ... > on the number of copies of that allele in the population ... that the probability is .50 that the offspring will also have it. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Exactly what are "recessive genes"?
    ... >> Hamilton's model defines an INDEPENDENT gene level of selection ... >> because that one allele has been granted an independent fitness within ... allele at one locus. ... altruism via selfish geneism within NATURE. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Logic of kin selection
    ... >Consider a diploid species with discrete generations, ... and an allele A that predisposes the individual to an altruistic ... For simplicity let these be pairs of ... The average fitness of Aa individuals is then: ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • RE: Fundamental theorems, dilemmas, fitness, and information.
    ... > Is there a limit to the rate at which natural selection can ... > increase fitness? ... > allele fixation requires "selective deaths". ... cost of substitution. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)