Re: An EPTly self-sufficient comment


"Peter F" <19eimc_minus19@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:e4idtr$161d$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[snip]
[IOW, the evolutionary background to the existence of selective/synaptic
hibernation menchanisms consists of "perfectly optionless ordeals" (so to
speak).
You would have to agree with that conclusion unless your are so perverse,
or would like to spite me so much, that you insist on counting
dying, or dying out, as an 'evolutionary pressure taming' option. ;->]

Or, perhaps we could fail to agree simply because we don't understand
you. ;-)

Curiously the word that is causing me a problem is 'background'.
Are you saying that the ordeals are an inevitable background in the
sense of 'background noise', or are you saying that the ordeals are
necessary to permit your neurological 'hibernation mechanisms' to
evolve? If the latter, could you repeat the argument that leads
to the conclusion that an 'optionless' ordeal can impart direction
to evolution? It seems to me that natural selection can only
'pick the winners' if options exist and if some organisms choose
the 'right' option. Or perhaps you are talking about 'real' options
at the organism-with-a-CNS level, rather than the metaphorical
pick-the-right-mutation options that I am thinking about. Some
kind of Baldwin effect?


.