[MD] MOQ & Evolution

[ian glendinning]

Hmm, David, you have a point .... but I'd like to cast doubt on three
others first.

You presume a problem with evolution ?

Clearly MoQ helps explain many (all) aspects of reality, evolution
inlcuded, and includes evolution as part of its own explanation. So
where's the problem ?

(1) "Too much" variety to select from ? Very subjective statement,
where do you get that from, too much relative to what ? The variety
isn't all sitting around waiting to be selected from anyway, it comes
and goes over long periods of time.

(2) Selection via elimination is "too slow". Same kind of subjective
statement; too slow relative to what ? The "improbability" argument
has surely been done to death, where do you get your too improbable
case from ?

Both the above are hugely complex over long timescales, so any simple
statement is going to be problematic .... but anyway.

(3) Selection of the "fittest" has little to with fitness at breeding
(or even physical fitness in competition) ... its about "quality of
fit with the environment" .... those that succeed by breeding fast are
simply exploiting alternatives to their limitations elsewhere. Again,
many complex aspects of fit, over many generations and time-scales.

(4) Built-in selection options .... now you may have a point.

Dennett style "engineering view" of evolution (and our friend Terry
Bristol of ISEPP, over at Friends of Wisdom). There certainly are such
things, natural things, quality things, emergent things, coherent
things .... planes of weakness, lines of least resistance, patterns of
optimum efficiencies, music of the spheres, requisite varieties ...
none of which need higher causal agency than quality. (Though of
course once conscious will has arisen, all bets are off, as the agents
influence their environments in directed ... and perverse ... ways,
but the process doesn't seem to "require" intelligent agents, just the
quality of dynamic interactions.)

Many natural processes influence the range and nature of options that
arise and await their fate in "de-selection". Darwin hadn't heard of
even 1% of them, but that doesn't mean he was 99% wrong.

Regards
Ian

On 9/8/06, David M <davidint at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi MOQ folk
>
> I wonder, is the main problem with evolutionary theory
> is that whilst natural selection is plausible it fails to explain
> why there is so much damn good variety to select from?
>
> Does not DQ and the free selection of quality not help us out here?
>
> And also help with time frames, because selection via eliminating of the
> less fit is too slow and unevolving unless there is some built in selection
> of options
> via quality decisions/agency that might be able to build up more complex
> structures?
>
> Selection of fitest at breeding gets on just fine with just re-breeding lots
> of bacteria.
>
> David M
>
>
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>