Life Gets Complicated

NAUT2

“In some sense man is a microcosm of the universe; therefore what man is, is a clue to the universe. We are enfolded in the universe”. – David Bohm

The conventional understanding of evolution is that natural selection driven by random mutation accounts for the development of complexity and the diversity of species. Mutations that are detrimental create organisms that will be less likely to survive and create progeny. Mutations that have beneficial effects bestow upon the organisms better survivability and a greater chance the mutation will persist into the next generation. Mutations that are neither beneficial or detrimental may or may not persist; however, a neutral mutation combined with another mutation might produce either a detrimental or beneficial effect. This slow progression of evolution driven by random mutation results in new species. From the earliest single celled organism to humans and whales new organisms and new species arose through chance. This is what Jaques Monod referred to when he said: “Our number came up in the Monte Carlo game.”

This conventional understanding may account for a lot of what happens in evolution. At the same time, it is undoubtedly a vast over simplification of how the diversity of species on our planet has arisen. Life seems to have more strategies at it disposal than waiting for random mutations. And even when random mutations do occur as a part of the evolutionary process, other mechanisms seem to play critical roles in the development of complexity. Continue reading

Posted in Human Evolution, Origin of Life, Quantum Mechanics, Randomness | 2 Comments

Are we hybrids?

Dr. Eugene McCarthy, a Ph.D in Genetics and an expert in hybridization, speculates in Human origins: Are we hybrids? that human beings are the result of hybridization between chimpanzees and pigs.  Continue reading

Posted in Brain size, Human Evolution | 6 Comments

Purpose and Life

A post by Marcelo Gleiser “Does Life Have a Purpose?” on the NPR 13.7 Cosmos & Culture blog seems to reiterate the usual stale arguments about teleology. Let me try to show the pointlessness of both the “purpose” argument for teleology and the scientific “ no purpose” argument. Both arguments, I believe, miss the real point.

Continue reading

Posted in Consciousness, Origin of Life | Leave a comment