Joan Roughgarden is an evolutionary biologist at Stanford that challenges Charles Darwin’s theory of sexual selection. Roughgarden is calling for an overhaul of the way science defines the mechanism for natural selection, which Darwin introduced as sexual selection. In her most recent book, The Genial Gene (2009), she has proposed an alternative theory, social selection, which is focused on the prevalence of teamwork and co-operation throughout nature, rather than the narrative from sexual selection which presents the world as fundamentally at conflict and individualistic. Her major opposition has come from modern-day Darwin theologians who feel that her examples, which she claims are counter to the sexual selection narrative, can all fit into it. They firmly believe that Darwin was limited by his times, but fundamentally, he was correct and thus his theory merely needs to be adapted to the times.
In a class I took from her in the fall we spent a great deal of time debating the need for social selection, while also questioning whether natural selection needs a similar overhaul. In the end the distinguishing factor between natural selection and sexual selection was the validity of the fundamental principles. For natural selection, the fundamental principle is that evolution occurs through a step-by-step mechanism of random mutations that survive and spread throughout the population if they give the individual an evolutionary advantage. If this is true, than Darwin was right and everything since can build off of his idea. In sexual selection, the fundamental principle is that the default behavior of nature is selfishness and conflict.
An interesting side note, which alas, never seems to be deemed unimportant, is the personal life of Joan Roughgarden. She is a M2F transsexual and has admitted, “she has an agenda: to develop a theory with room for outsiders like gays and transsexuals.” This agenda, however, does not mean she’s wrong. The question remains, what is the fundament principal of life, co-operation or competition?
Review of The Genial Gene: http://www.theamericanscholar.org/the-peacock-problem-by-long/
Impact: http://autogynephiliac.blogspot.com/2009/12/joan-roughgarden-on-social-evolution.html
Still I think Darwin Rocks. Right or wrong, he got the conversation started.
Sam
jueves, 3 de junio de 2010
Richard Dawkins and Children
One of the most well known modern evolutionary authors is Richard Dawkins. He has written such best sellers as ¨The Selfish Gene¨ and ¨The God Dilusion.¨ With his next book however, he is looking for a slightly different genre and audience. He plans to write a children´s book that addresses what he views as ¨putting unscientific views in the minds of our children.¨ He remembers growing up reading children´s books where princes turned into frogs and things is now debating whether this has a ¨pernicious¨ effect on the minds of our young. Most recently, he has condemned Harry Potter even though he admits that he has not read the books themselves.
What he aims to accomplish with one or more children´s books is to help children to learn to ¨confront and deal with the evidence. He does not hold children at fault for not being taught these things, but even sees children that are exposed to these types of books as "abused." He even goes on to claim that this type of abuse is actually worse than conventional child abuse and that his books will help to remedy this problem. He claims that these are the types of books that he would have wanted to read when he was a kid. Will others agree??
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/31/arts/31arts-THEGODDELUSI_BRF.html?_r=1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/3255972/Harry-Potter-fails-to-cast-spell-over-Professor-Richard-Dawkins.html
Zach Ming
What he aims to accomplish with one or more children´s books is to help children to learn to ¨confront and deal with the evidence. He does not hold children at fault for not being taught these things, but even sees children that are exposed to these types of books as "abused." He even goes on to claim that this type of abuse is actually worse than conventional child abuse and that his books will help to remedy this problem. He claims that these are the types of books that he would have wanted to read when he was a kid. Will others agree??
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/31/arts/31arts-THEGODDELUSI_BRF.html?_r=1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/3255972/Harry-Potter-fails-to-cast-spell-over-Professor-Richard-Dawkins.html
Zach Ming
martes, 1 de junio de 2010
Chimp or Human?
Last fall, the discovery of a new skeleton in Ethiopia was hailed as a breakthrough in early Human evolution. The skeleton, classified as Ardipithecus ramidus and nicknamed "Ardi", is a million years older than the famous "Lucy." Ardi is believed to be one of the first to walk on two feet instead of knuckles, and is believed to have lived in woodland areas. This first shocked scientists who originally believed that humans started walking upright when they moved from tress onto the grasslands of the savannah. Now the entire study is being questioned as the classification of the skeleton is being doubted. Some scientists are starting to see if whether the skeleton is actually an ancestor of the modern chimp instead of modern Humans. This would require a stretch, others believe, because it would mean that the ape reverted back to more ancstral morphologies when evolving to become the chimpanzees we know. Some are also studying the surrounding fossils to determine the exact flora that surrounded Ardi during its life. The thoughts that it lived in a woodland area is being explored further as the fossilized vegetation may show otherwise. Missing Link? Or two new spaces to fill?
Jason
Link: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hbeoT7UVejy3nQodKBfYAaQ28N_gD9FVB6L00
Jason
Link: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hbeoT7UVejy3nQodKBfYAaQ28N_gD9FVB6L00
George R. Price: Altruism and Evolution
I satisfied my Darwinophilia today with an article on George Price (1922-1975), a geneticist and evolutionary theorist. Price contended that altruism in nature could be explained by evolution. His equation, creatively named the Price Equation, provided a model for this pattern. Altruism occurs in his model when a certain action increases both the fitness of the organism and the average fitness of its population (or possibly, community).
Price diesplayed altruism in his own life, at one point housing four homeless people in his house, as he slept in his office. Mentally unstable for much of the later part of his life, he commited suicide at the age of 52.
Links: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Selflessness-of-strangers/624232
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_R._Price
Ian
Price diesplayed altruism in his own life, at one point housing four homeless people in his house, as he slept in his office. Mentally unstable for much of the later part of his life, he commited suicide at the age of 52.
Links: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Selflessness-of-strangers/624232
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_R._Price
Ian
Darwin on the Stage Once Again
Throughout the quarter we have dedicated a fair amount of time to debating “The Wait.” This period in Darwin’s life is the 20 years between when he first began developing his theory of Evolution while aboard the H.M.S. Beagle and when he finally published his masterpiece, On the Origin of Species (1859). We have discussed many different possibilities that likely worked together to yield this wait, including his sickness, his other academic ambitions, his fear of being wrong and the list goes on. In the play Trumpery by Peter Parnell, which is now being put on in the Olney Theater, the long wait is attributed to an internal conflict within Darwin between Science and Religion.
Though the question of his religious struggles may not be supported by much information, it does present an interesting and compelling dialogue. A famous quote from the play comes as Darwin says, “If I finish my book, I’m a killer. I murder God.” For me this is a very interesting idea, because I live by my faith, but also understand and agree with creation through the forces of Evolution. I do not see God and the literal word of the Bible as linked together, but at the time of Darwin that was the stance of the church. Then if you were to image Darwin as a person of devout faith, he would certainly have had to struggle with whether his theory was worth destroying faith. I believe, however, that faith has survived, but the question does remain, is there a scientific discovery that would destroy my faith? At the moment I think of faith and science as controlling two different worlds of my life, but still I don’t want to deny science the opportunity to try and answer the questions that I have answered through my faith.
The final piece of the article that I would like to touch upon is the director, Jim Petosa’s comments about why Darwin. He talked about how Darwin “has made an enormous impact on the modern worldview.” I think an important part of Petosa’s comment that isn’t overtly said is that Darwin did not just change the way the scientific community saw the world. He is very clear that Darwin changed the way the entire world saw the view. I think this change was both in the general population’s understanding of the process of evolution, as well as their understanding of what is certain. Charles Darwin helped people to realize that just because we’ve always thought in a particular way, that doesn’t mean that we are thinking about it in the right way.
Full Article: http://baltimore.broadwayworld.com/article/TRUMPERY_Plays_Olney_Theatre_Center_6974_20100514
Darwin Rocks.
Sam
Though the question of his religious struggles may not be supported by much information, it does present an interesting and compelling dialogue. A famous quote from the play comes as Darwin says, “If I finish my book, I’m a killer. I murder God.” For me this is a very interesting idea, because I live by my faith, but also understand and agree with creation through the forces of Evolution. I do not see God and the literal word of the Bible as linked together, but at the time of Darwin that was the stance of the church. Then if you were to image Darwin as a person of devout faith, he would certainly have had to struggle with whether his theory was worth destroying faith. I believe, however, that faith has survived, but the question does remain, is there a scientific discovery that would destroy my faith? At the moment I think of faith and science as controlling two different worlds of my life, but still I don’t want to deny science the opportunity to try and answer the questions that I have answered through my faith.
The final piece of the article that I would like to touch upon is the director, Jim Petosa’s comments about why Darwin. He talked about how Darwin “has made an enormous impact on the modern worldview.” I think an important part of Petosa’s comment that isn’t overtly said is that Darwin did not just change the way the scientific community saw the world. He is very clear that Darwin changed the way the entire world saw the view. I think this change was both in the general population’s understanding of the process of evolution, as well as their understanding of what is certain. Charles Darwin helped people to realize that just because we’ve always thought in a particular way, that doesn’t mean that we are thinking about it in the right way.
Full Article: http://baltimore.broadwayworld.com/article/TRUMPERY_Plays_Olney_Theatre_Center_6974_20100514
Darwin Rocks.
Sam
World Food Famine??
The cassava plant, also known as manioc, tapioca, and yuca could be facing the worst threat of disease in its history. A virus called brown streak is spreading at an astronomical rate and could threaten millions of East African lives as it destroys the crop. After rice and wheat, cassava is the world´s third most source of calories. The virus has been around for over 20 years, but it was not until 2004 that a mutant form of the virus appeared in central Africa. Two years ago, scientists and researchers began to become increasingly alarmed by the rate of the spread of the virus. The Bill and Melinda Gates foundation also realized this and donated $27 million dollars towards research on the virus. If a solution is not found and the virus continues its exponential spreading and growth, it could cause a famine not known since the Irish potato famine of the 1840´s. The plant is in part so popular because of its extreme durability in droughts and general farming neglect. However, it is no match for the virus.
Scientists are extremely worried about the cuttings that farmers sell to one another that may help to cause the spread of the virus. At the best of the worst case scenarios, scientists hope to contain the virus in Africa and prevent it from spreading to Thailand, Brazil, Indonesia, and-or China. However, this scenario would still cause donors to have to pour billions of dollars in aid to help feed the starving continent and prevent potential deadly civil wars. Research is continuing to find a cure or resistant strain to the virus, but until that happens we can only wait and see.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/01/science/01cassava.html?hpw
Zach Ming
Scientists are extremely worried about the cuttings that farmers sell to one another that may help to cause the spread of the virus. At the best of the worst case scenarios, scientists hope to contain the virus in Africa and prevent it from spreading to Thailand, Brazil, Indonesia, and-or China. However, this scenario would still cause donors to have to pour billions of dollars in aid to help feed the starving continent and prevent potential deadly civil wars. Research is continuing to find a cure or resistant strain to the virus, but until that happens we can only wait and see.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/01/science/01cassava.html?hpw
Zach Ming
"Intelligent Design. That´s one goal of synthetic biology"
Olivia Judson, of The New York times believes that the recent creation of the genome of a creature that no longer exists anywhere on the Earth is the first baby step to new life-forms. Supposedly, we will sit around the company table and brainstorm what kind of lifeform we would like to design.
Examples f how we have already improved on gene sequences iclude the green flourescent protein naturally expressed in jellies. This gene has been altered so as to flouresce more brightly, and is used extensively to tag proteins in cell biology.
The first genome to be fully constructed was poliovirus 8 years ago. Now we can sequence bacteria and have created new bacteria that do not exist in nature. However, designing a life form on our own is still very much impossible, because biological systems are too complex and always have unpredictable components that, when attempting to copy them will behave in unexpected ways. We can make proteins, but we cannot be sure how this new protein will fold and how it will interact with other proteins. A good metaphor is that we can make all the parts, but still need to use an existing factory to build them. We also cannot add all of the machinery to a vacant cytoplasm and expect it to start building proteins.
This only deals with the mechanics of the organism. What about trying to wire the circuitry? We can´t even begin to understand side affects of chemical levels on the nervous system. The chances of creating something that doesn´t have devastating gliches is very small. We have begun to build molecules that can store information just like DNA, but they are read differently by the machinery of the cell. This allows us to write our own code, but we still have no idea how it will be expressed.
With these psuedo-DNA structures man may create a "second nature" with animals that cannot interact with the animals of the wild instantly, instead of taking thousands of years. Supposedly, the "bannisters" of the DNA strand are far more important than previously thought and are essential for any information-storing molecule.
The article concludes by saying that there are many uses for designer organisms, and they may be very dangerous or detrimental to man, but they will also help us better understand nature as we know it.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/baby-steps-to-new-life-forms/#more-50339
Japan will make Pókemon before anybody knows what happened,
Spencer
Examples f how we have already improved on gene sequences iclude the green flourescent protein naturally expressed in jellies. This gene has been altered so as to flouresce more brightly, and is used extensively to tag proteins in cell biology.
The first genome to be fully constructed was poliovirus 8 years ago. Now we can sequence bacteria and have created new bacteria that do not exist in nature. However, designing a life form on our own is still very much impossible, because biological systems are too complex and always have unpredictable components that, when attempting to copy them will behave in unexpected ways. We can make proteins, but we cannot be sure how this new protein will fold and how it will interact with other proteins. A good metaphor is that we can make all the parts, but still need to use an existing factory to build them. We also cannot add all of the machinery to a vacant cytoplasm and expect it to start building proteins.
This only deals with the mechanics of the organism. What about trying to wire the circuitry? We can´t even begin to understand side affects of chemical levels on the nervous system. The chances of creating something that doesn´t have devastating gliches is very small. We have begun to build molecules that can store information just like DNA, but they are read differently by the machinery of the cell. This allows us to write our own code, but we still have no idea how it will be expressed.
With these psuedo-DNA structures man may create a "second nature" with animals that cannot interact with the animals of the wild instantly, instead of taking thousands of years. Supposedly, the "bannisters" of the DNA strand are far more important than previously thought and are essential for any information-storing molecule.
The article concludes by saying that there are many uses for designer organisms, and they may be very dangerous or detrimental to man, but they will also help us better understand nature as we know it.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/baby-steps-to-new-life-forms/#more-50339
Japan will make Pókemon before anybody knows what happened,
Spencer
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)