Re: Stephen Wolfram vs. Charles Darwin on natural selection

dkomo <dkomo871@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:-

"Biological systems are often cited as supreme examples of complexity in
nature, and it is not uncommon for it to be assumed that their
complexity must be somehow of a fundamentally higher order than other
systems. And typically it is thought that this must be a consequence of
the rather unique processes of adaption and natural selection that
operate in biological systems. ... what I have come to believe is that
many of the most obvious examples of complexity in biological systems
actually have very little to do with adaption or natural selection."

--Stpehen Wolfram, _A New Kind of Science_, p. 383

JE:-
Hi dkomo,

Complexity is equated with an decrease of entropy mostly because
increasing complexity can be equated with increasing levels of order.
However, crystals are well ordered while displaying a _higher_ level of
entropy compared to the same substance uncrystallized. I think what we
may need is a better definition of complexity. I would say that
complexity could be defined as the number of nested (proper) sets of
fitness per Darwinian unit of selection because nested sub parts can
only form fitness dependent biological sub entities of single Darwinian
units of selection e.g. genes remain fitness dependent on one adult
(fertile) form. Nested, i.e. NON reversible sets of fitness (no matter
how you define fitness) proposed as a measure of organism complexity
must not to be confused with the number of intersecting sets of fitness
because these form reversible populations of Darwinian mono-centric
(single) units of selection _disallowing populations as valid units of
selection_. For example I would hypothesize that diploblasty (a
condition of the ovum in which there are two primary germ layers: the
ectoderm and endoderm) always remains less complex that triploblasty
(the ovum contains three primary germ layers: the ectoderm, mesoderm and
endoderm.


From the Web article:
"To summarize, the lines have been drawn thus: Darwin says that natural
selection causes complexity by continuously moving organisms into
tighter synergy with their environment, necessitating said complexity.
Wolfram says complexity arises naturally with even the smallest change
in the organism's genetic makeup, and that natural selection serves
mainly to rein it in by culling the unworkable variations."

JE:-
Natural selection may only appear to reduce complexity e.g. cave fish
can be observed to be selected to cover their (now useless) eyes with
skin in order to avoid damage and therefore infection while losing most
of their body pigmentation. However, other body systems may increase in
complexity. I would agree with Darwin but would express it differently:
natural selection will tend to increase the number of nested levels of
selection within each Darwinian mono-centric unit of selection (each
adult form). IOW I would propose that it will remain impossible for
natural selection to evolve diploblasty from triploblasty (the reverse
of what natural history has demonstrated).



Regards,

John Edser
Independent Researcher

edser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx






...

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Evolution increases the computational ability of organisms.
    ... >> Fluctuating selection would satisfy Gould equally well. ... >> Probably the major theme is that complexity follows a random walk ... You were trying to justify a claim that genome length increases through ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Species diversity through time
    ... again like an ordinary random walk. ... Gould didn't think evolution was a random walk. ... He knew that there was such a thing as natural selection, ... of increasing complexity, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Stephen Wolfram vs. Charles Darwin on natural selection
    ... Complexity is equated with an decrease of entropy mostly because ... increasing complexity can be equated with increasing levels of order. ... falsifiable unit of selection. ... Darwinian theory, Neo Darwinists cannot see any difference at all ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Species diversity through time
    ... That's why I say evolution is a random walk in Gould's view. ... He knew that there was such a thing as natural selection, ... of increasing complexity, ... I only got started seriously on the subject areas of emergence and self-organization in the last two months after reaching a state of utter exasperation with the explanatory ability of the received view in modern biology. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Species diversity through time
    ... Gould didn't think evolution was a random walk. ... He knew that there was such a thing as natural selection, ... of increasing complexity, ... explanatory ability of the received view in modern biology. ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading