Re: What natural selection can do - whoisyourcreator.com
- From: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (John S. Wilkins)
- Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2009 14:59:44 +1000
Garamond Lethe <cartographical@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 06 Apr 2009 10:50:31 -0400, Steven L. wrote:
backspace wrote:
http://www.whoisyourcreator.com/natural_selection.html
=== What Natural Selection Can Do: === Natural selection can preserve a
change in an existing trait or feature by having organisms with that
change survive and reproduce at a higher rate.
=== rephrase ===
Natural selection preserves a feature by having organisms with that
feature survive.
Question:
Other than noting the feature survived how was the its preservability
measured?
You are arguing that natural selection is a tautology.
This argument has been made many times in the past--and it's been
refuted.
In the modern ToE, fitness is NOT determined by survival and
reproduction. It's a more objective trait, of the organism's abilities
to function in its environment. But even if it has slightly superior
fitness for its environment, it may still be gobbled up by a predator
before it even has a chance to reproduce. Life's a bitch. And who
survives long enough to reproduce is often a matter of luck.
Hmmmm.... my textbook gives the following definitions:
fitness: The number of offspring left by an individual after one
generation. The fitness of an allele is the average fitness of
individuals that carry that allele.
fitness component: Traits, such as survival, mating success, and
reproduction, that combine to determine fitness.
If you have a cite for your definition of fitness I'd be interested to
read it.
It's called the "propensity" definition of fitness. Mostly it's proposed
and defended by philosophers:
Mills, Susan K., and John H. Beatty. 1979. The propensity interpretation
of fitness. Philosophy of Science 46:263-286.
Rosenberg, Alexander. 1982. On the Propensity Definition of Fitness.
Philosophy of Science 49 (2):268-273.
Brandon, Robert, and John Beatty. 1984. The Propensity Interpretation of
'Fitness'--No Interpretation Is No Substitute. Philosophy of Science 51
(2):342-347.
Rosenberg, Alexander, and Mary Williams. 1986. Fitness as Primitive and
Propensity. Philosophy of Science 53 (3):412-418.
Bouchard, Frédéric, and Alex Rosenberg. 2004. Fitness, Probability and
the Principles of Natural Selection. British Journal for the Philosophy
of Science 55 (4):693-712.
Krimbas, Costas B. 2004. On fitness. Biology and Philosophy 19
(2):185-203.
Rosenberg, Alexander, and Frederic Bouchard. 2005. Matthen and Ariew's
obituary for fitness: reports of its death have been greatly exaggerated
Biology and Philosophy 20:343–353.
Abrams, Marshall. 2007. Fitness and Propensity's Annulment? Biology and
Philosophy 22 (1):115-130.
--
John S. Wilkins, Philosophy, University of Sydney
scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts
But al be that he was a philosophre,
Yet hadde he but litel gold in cofre
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: What natural selection can do - whoisyourcreator.com
- From: Garamond Lethe
- Re: What natural selection can do - whoisyourcreator.com
- From: Dr. Acula
- Re: What natural selection can do - whoisyourcreator.com
- References:
- What natural selection can do - whoisyourcreator.com
- From: backspace
- Re: What natural selection can do - whoisyourcreator.com
- From: Steven L.
- Re: What natural selection can do - whoisyourcreator.com
- From: Garamond Lethe
- What natural selection can do - whoisyourcreator.com
- Prev by Date: POTM Re: views of academic scientists
- Next by Date: Re: Texas: Board Set to Vote on Challenge to Evolution
- Previous by thread: Re: What natural selection can do - whoisyourcreator.com
- Next by thread: Re: What natural selection can do - whoisyourcreator.com
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|