Evolutionary psychology

The origins of the imperative, "know thyself", are lost in the sands of time, but the age-old examination of human consciousness continues here.

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Ierrellus » Sat Oct 23, 2021 1:06 pm

Can the complexities of eyes and brains be explained by natural selection?
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 13410
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Sculptor » Sun Oct 24, 2021 6:59 pm

Ierrellus wrote:Can the complexities of eyes and brains be explained by natural selection?


Yes.
Sculptor
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1675
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Sculptor » Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:02 pm

felix dakat wrote:
Sculptor wrote:


And yet you are claiming no teleology??
tututut.


Where do you see teleology implied by me?


"design" is teleological by definition
Sculptor
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1675
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby iambiguous » Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:12 pm

Sculptor wrote:
Ierrellus wrote:Can the complexities of eyes and brains be explained by natural selection?


Yes.


On the other hand, can all of the terrible afflictions to the eyes and the brains that mere mortals endure be explained by a God that is not basically a sadistic monster?

Or, sure, Kushner's God.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=176529
Then here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 5&t=185296
And here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 43840
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Sculptor » Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:40 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Sculptor wrote:
Ierrellus wrote:Can the complexities of eyes and brains be explained by natural selection?


Yes.


On the other hand, can all of the terrible afflictions to the eyes and the brains that mere mortals endure be explained by a God that is not basically a sadistic monster?

Or, sure, Kushner's God.


In the presence of disease, suffering and disease can only indicate a sadistic god, if you have to insist that god is a reality.
But I rather think that there is no god.
But eyes and brains with and without their associated diseases, suffering and problems can be explained by natural selection as long as you do not expect every aspect of nature such as traits and features of living things to have to mandate a successful or useful function.
The beauty of natural selection is that 99% of traits and behaviours renders no specific selective advantage and this can be true without diminishing the theory one iota.
Sculptor
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1675
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby felix dakat » Sun Oct 24, 2021 7:50 pm

Sculptor wrote:
felix dakat wrote:
Sculptor wrote:


And yet you are claiming no teleology??
tututut.


Where do you see teleology implied by me?


"design" is teleological by definition


When did I claim 'design'?
Hate the ignorance not the ignorant!
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 10132
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Sun Oct 24, 2021 8:10 pm

Ierrellus wrote:Can the complexities of eyes and brains be explained by natural selection?


No.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 11109
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Ierrellus » Wed Oct 27, 2021 1:17 pm

Pedro I Rengel wrote:
Ierrellus wrote:Can the complexities of eyes and brains be explained by natural selection?


No.

Why or why not?
"We must love one another or die." W.H.Auden
I admit I'm an asshole. Now, can we get back to the conversation?
From the mad poet of McKinley Ave.
Ierrellus
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 13410
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:52 pm
Location: state of evolving

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Sculptor » Wed Oct 27, 2021 2:27 pm

The most primitive organisms sustained themselves by absorbing chemicals from the environment. SSome of these processes required light energy, and soon through variations in DNA transcriptions caused in part by the very same light that those processes required, caused variations in subsequent generations. The light energy was usable in differing degrees by these variants, and those that managed to orient themselves towards the light out competed those that were not so able. In time single celled organisms learned to move towards light sources, and sub cellular structures were better able to become light sentitive.
Organelles that were able to detect light gave organisms that were able to emply light as a source of energy were massively advantaged. As creatures evolved in multicellular organisms these organelles became specialised cells whose main fucntion was the detection of light and the communication of that source to other cells in the organism.
At some point a branch occurred between plant like and animal like organisms whereby light detection and light energy gathering becames differentiated.
SOme of the most primitive animals have what you might call psuedo-eyes, or proto-eyes that are able through nervous communications to inform the rest of the organism as to where the light is. And where these were mobile, plants , on the other hand, turned these skills to Chloroplasts, capable of using light to convert CO2 and water into carbohydrates.
The motile organisms were now able to detect changes in light and began to map their environments in different ways.
And so on...
Sculptor
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1675
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Wed Oct 27, 2021 7:47 pm

Sculptor wrote: caused in part by the very same light that those processes required,


All bullshit aside, I am interested about this. Are you saying that external factors can cause variations in transcriptions of DNA?
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 11109
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Wed Oct 27, 2021 7:51 pm

Ierrellus wrote:
Pedro I Rengel wrote:
Ierrellus wrote:Can the complexities of eyes and brains be explained by natural selection?


No.

Why or why not?


Well, for the reasons I stated earlier. "Natural selection" attempts to explain how environmental factors can allow or not a change to be transmitted, but it cannot explain what causes those changes to happen.

But even that is iffy, because many genes are actively counterproductive to both survival and reproduction with 0 benefits.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 11109
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Wed Oct 27, 2021 8:40 pm

On a philosophical level, it is even debatable whether a cause-consequence approach is adequate. It is a linear analysis that necessarily excludes more than it includes. A single chain of single links of cause and consequence must be found to exist, and if not found, then forced.

A wider view that includes all factors non-exclusively can allow one to look for patterns that are consistent and suggest coherence through time. Relationships between factors can often be apparent and hold with perfect consistency with no cause-consequence being discernible without abusing reason with endless, precarious chains that inevitably become circular.

What matters for science is not the determination of causality, but the consistency of its findings. Cause-consequence will always beg the question, such that one inevitably winds up with the Aristotelian paradox of the First Cause.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 11109
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Sculptor » Thu Oct 28, 2021 8:45 pm

Pedro I Rengel wrote:On a philosophical level, it is even debatable whether a cause-consequence approach is adequate. It is a linear analysis that necessarily excludes more than it includes. A single chain of single links of cause and consequence must be found to exist, and if not found, then forced.

Who says cause/consequence has to be linear?

A wider view that includes all factors non-exclusively can allow one to look for patterns that are consistent and suggest coherence through time. Relationships between factors can often be apparent and hold with perfect consistency with no cause-consequence being discernible without abusing reason with endless, precarious chains that inevitably become circular.

You have a shockingly naive view of necessity.

What matters for science is not the determination of causality, but the consistency of its findings. Cause-consequence will always beg the question, such that one inevitably winds up with the Aristotelian paradox of the First Cause.


Out of date.
I think we've moved on from Aristotle; the man that thought women had fewer teeth than men.
Sculptor
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1675
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Sculptor » Thu Oct 28, 2021 8:48 pm

Pedro I Rengel wrote:
Sculptor wrote: caused in part by the very same light that those processes required,


All bullshit aside, I am interested about this. Are you saying that external factors can cause variations in transcriptions of DNA?


Of course. This is a complete no brainer.
Radaiation is one. Plus a massive list of oncogenic chemicals.

How else do you think mutations and variations occur?
Sculptor
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1675
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Thu Oct 28, 2021 8:58 pm

Sculptor wrote:Who says cause/consequence has to be linear?


I mean...

A consequence has a cause, and a cause gives a consequence. There's not really a way around that. Not because you can't find it so much as because it's baked into the definition.

Sculptor wrote:You have a shockingly naive view of necessity.


Yo momma.

Sculptor wrote:Out of date.
I think we've moved on from Aristotle; the man that thought women had fewer teeth than men.


You keep making these assertions.

Sculptor wrote:Of course. This is a complete no brainer.
Radaiation is one. Plus a massive list of oncogenic chemicals.


Well, to be clear, you said light. And I guess I don't see why other chemicals couldn't interfere with DNA as it splits, but I would need you to be a little more specific as to how.

Sculptor wrote:How else do you think mutations and variations occur?


That's the question people tend to sort of jump over.

But you seem to be saying that variations occur only because of extragenetic factors acting on the moment of transcription. Again, you are not being too clear, but I'm interested.

And if I could bother you, answer me this: do you believe discernible patterns can be found in the occurence of variations, or do you believe them to be simply random?
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 11109
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Sculptor » Fri Oct 29, 2021 3:56 pm

Pedro I Rengel wrote:
Sculptor wrote:Who says cause/consequence has to be linear?


I mean...

A consequence has a cause, and a cause gives a consequence. There's not really a way around that. Not because you can't find it so much as because it's baked into the definition.

Like I said below - you are clueless.

Sculptor wrote:You have a shockingly naive view of necessity.


Yo momma.

Sculptor wrote:Out of date.
I think we've moved on from Aristotle; the man that thought women had fewer teeth than men.


You keep making these assertions.

Sculptor wrote:Of course. This is a complete no brainer.
Radaiation is one. Plus a massive list of oncogenic chemicals.


Well, to be clear, you said light. And I guess I don't see why other chemicals couldn't interfere with DNA as it splits, but I would need you to be a little more specific as to how.

Sculptor wrote:How else do you think mutations and variations occur?


That's the question people tend to sort of jump over.

But you seem to be saying that variations occur only because of extragenetic factors acting on the moment of transcription. Again, you are not being too clear, but I'm interested.

And if I could bother you, answer me this: do you believe discernible patterns can be found in the occurence of variations, or do you believe them to be simply random?


What the fuck do you think skin cancer is?
How the fuck have you managed to make it to adulthood without learing that radiation causes mutations.
Your ignorance is astonishing.
https://www.britannica.com/science/radi ... -mutations

Fucking read a book.
Sculptor
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1675
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Fri Oct 29, 2021 4:05 pm

Ah, you're an idiot.

You know, when you were Silhouette, at least you tried to make arguments.

On the other hand, that made your stupidity more patent, so maybe this is better.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 11109
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Sculptor » Sat Oct 30, 2021 6:31 pm

Pedro I Rengel wrote:Ah, you're an idiot.

You know, when you were Silhouette, at least you tried to make arguments.

On the other hand, that made your stupidity more patent, so maybe this is better.


I do not know what you mean by SIlhouette.
But there is no doubt of your ignorance and stupidity.
Last edited by Sculptor on Sun Oct 31, 2021 12:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sculptor
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1675
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Sat Oct 30, 2021 6:33 pm

Sculptor wrote:I do not know what you mean by Silhouette.


You know, your old account.

https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/memberl ... file&u=520

Silhouette.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 11109
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Sat Oct 30, 2021 6:53 pm

Silhouette wrote:
Abstract wrote:Well you seemed to be saying that those who evolve have an advantage... but being immortal is as if being that which has already achieved the goal that which evolution is moving us ever towards.

I'm not about to claim that evolution has a goal - it is ongoing - but I am speculating about a point where the evolution of one species is so far advanced relative to others that it can afford to not need to die.

Evolution (e.g. developing the trait of mortality) does have an advantage, but when you no longer need such an advantage then mortality may be bred out of a species. It could become no longer needed. Reproduction may also cease to be needed, in line with this. This is not to say sex would also be phased out, but fertility would.

And all this is not to say that immortality would be desirable forever (which sounds strange and contradictory, but by immortality I mean the lack of pre-programmed aging and weakening to the point of expiration as opposed to invulnerability to other life-threatening forces) because other species may come to catch up with us and compete with us in a threatening way, causing mortality to be bred back in.


Here, for example, you demonstrate a very Aristotelian view of something causing something in a very linear fashion. Of course, the only way cause and effect operates.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 11109
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby pood » Sat Oct 30, 2021 7:44 pm

Well, to be clear, you said light.


Light is radiation. All light is radiation.

And I guess I don't see why other chemicals couldn't interfere with DNA as it splits, but I would need you to be a little more specific as to how.


Extrinsic factors including chemicals and radiation routinely interfere with DNA transcription.

Sculptor wrote:How else do you think mutations and variations occur?


That's the question people tend to sort of jump over.


Nobody jumps over this question. The causes of mutations are very well understood.

But you seem to be saying that variations occur only because of extragenetic factors acting on the moment of transcription. Again, you are not being too clear, but I'm interested.


He didn’t say ONLY.

And if I could bother you, answer me this: do you believe discernible patterns can be found in the occurrence of variations, or do you believe them to be simply random?


Mutations are always random with respect to the environment. In a given environment, mutations occur all the time. Some, fortuitously, may be beneficial, in that particular environment. Some, non-fortuitously, may be detrimental in that particular environment. The majority of mutations, however, are neutral, neither conferring nor impeding a survival advantage.

In the 20th century, a population of bacteria acquired a mutation that allowed them to digest Nylon. This mutation probably occurred untold numbers of times before, but in the past, before the invention of Nylon, the mutation was either neutral or detrimental to survival.

Fortuitously, these particular bacteria were living in the waste water of a Nylon manufacturing plant. Their numbers exploded, because they had acquired a mutation that gave then an advantage over bacteria that could not digest nylon.

There are patterns to evolution, but they are only discernible after the fact. There are no a priori patterns to evolution, because it is a mindless process that has no goal in mind. Evolution is not progress. It is only a change in allele frequencies over time. Humans are an accidental product of a largely stochastic process. It is only largely stochastic because while mutations are random, natural selection is not. But natural selection is not the whole of evolution. Genetic drift, which is totally accidental, may play a predominant role at the genotypic level and even at the phenotypic level. The biochemist Larry Moran calls this “evolution by accident.”

Basically, humans are accidents.
pood
Thinker
 
Posts: 670
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 5:29 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Sat Oct 30, 2021 7:50 pm

pood wrote:Light is radiation. All light is radiation.


Yeah, but light is a specific type, and I am wondering if he contends that light modifies DNA transcription chemically.

pood wrote:
Extrinsic factors including chemicals and radiation routinely interfere with DNA transcription.


I guess you missed the part where:

Pedro I Rengell wrote: And I guess I don't see why other chemicals couldn't interfere with DNA as it splits, but I would need you to be a little more specific as to how.


pood wrote:Nobody jumps over this question.


They do. You are now.

pood wrote:The causes of mutations are very well understood.


Not by you.

pood wrote:He didn’t say ONLY.


He did.

pood wrote:Mutations are always random with respect to the environment.


That was not my question. And the proper wording would be "independent of," not "random in respect to." If there is a pattern, it is not random.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 11109
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby pood » Sat Oct 30, 2021 8:11 pm

How am I jumping over the question? There is a huge literature of the causes of mutation. Use Google. Educate yourself. Do you expect me to give you a detailed post of all the causes of mutations? Am I being paid to do this?

Mutations are random with respect to the environment, or if you prefer, independent of the environment. Both ways of putting it are exactly the same.

Did you read my example of the nylon-digesting bacteria?

The question of whether patterns are random or not is a bit of a red herring, I think. Are snowflake patterns random? They are all different but they are all caused. There is no designer designing snowflakes. Perhaps the word random should be discarded. Mutations are uncorrelated with the environment. Or independent of it, as you say. Fine. The point is this: It could have been the case that mutations occur in response to environmental change. In the nylon eating bacteria example, that would mean that such bacteria underwent a mutation in response to the presence of bacteria, to make it able to eat bacteria. But the evidence shows this is not the case. So the mutation was fortuitous and the lucky bastards just happened to acquire the mutation in the presence of a Nylon feast.
Last edited by pood on Sat Oct 30, 2021 8:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
pood
Thinker
 
Posts: 670
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 5:29 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby pood » Sat Oct 30, 2021 8:14 pm

pood
Thinker
 
Posts: 670
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 5:29 pm

Re: Evolutionary psychology

Postby Pedro I Rengel » Sat Oct 30, 2021 8:21 pm

"I don't know what it is but other people do" is a way of jumping over the question.
User avatar
Pedro I Rengel
ᛈᛖᛉᛖᛉ
 
Posts: 11109
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 2:55 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Psychology and Mind



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users