by jimwalton » Sun Dec 10, 2023 2:37 pm
Right. I had numerous conversations about 5-6 years ago with Denis Alexander (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Alexander). He said "random" really isn't an appropriate word to use when it comes to natural selection.
Biologists use the word “random” differently than a mathematician would. Some might say “random” mutations take place without reference to the health and wellbeing of the organism in question.
Mathematically that’s not true. If you look at mutations where the genome is sequenced, every baby has approximately 60 new mutations. Those are not random—they come in clusters (they tend to occur at certain points in the genome far more than at other points). If they were random, they could come in any position, but they’re not. They’re not randomly generated.
If you look at the periodic table, the elements all have properties that define what they can do. The whole of chemistry is highly organized (fine-tuned) and not really “random” at all.
You can’t derive “purpose” from biology, but biology is not purposelessness. Evolutionary biology doesn’t look like just rocks on the beach, strewn about randomly. In biology many designs converge. When you look at evolutionary history, it’s all highly organized. It’s not random in any sense. Evolution is not a chance process (Dawkins). It’s highly organized and not a chance process. “Human beings were not a random accident but that something like a human is a predictable outcome of the evolutionary process: It’s more like solving a puzzle than writing a novel” (Conway Morris).
Natural selection ensures that genomic variations have advantages to succeed. It’s almost as if the system was rigged to succeed. It’s not neutral, but it’s not determined either. Although the changes in the organism are “random,” it’s both conservative and ordered. Natural selection is a process involving accepting adaptations and operates to preserve the organism.
Right. I had numerous conversations about 5-6 years ago with Denis Alexander ([url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Alexander[/url]). He said "random" really isn't an appropriate word to use when it comes to natural selection.
[quote]Biologists use the word “random” differently than a mathematician would. Some might say “random” mutations take place without reference to the health and wellbeing of the organism in question.
Mathematically that’s not true. If you look at mutations where the genome is sequenced, every baby has approximately 60 new mutations. Those are not random—they come in clusters (they tend to occur at certain points in the genome far more than at other points). If they were random, they could come in any position, but they’re not. They’re not randomly generated.
If you look at the periodic table, the elements all have properties that define what they can do. The whole of chemistry is highly organized (fine-tuned) and not really “random” at all.
You can’t derive “purpose” from biology, but biology is not purposelessness. Evolutionary biology doesn’t look like just rocks on the beach, strewn about randomly. In biology many designs converge. When you look at evolutionary history, it’s all highly organized. It’s not random in any sense. Evolution is not a chance process (Dawkins). It’s highly organized and not a chance process. “Human beings were not a random accident but that something like a human is a predictable outcome of the evolutionary process: It’s more like solving a puzzle than writing a novel” (Conway Morris).
Natural selection ensures that genomic variations have advantages to succeed. It’s almost as if the system was rigged to succeed. It’s not neutral, but it’s not determined either. Although the changes in the organism are “random,” it’s both conservative and ordered. Natural selection is a process involving accepting adaptations and operates to preserve the organism.[/quote]