Progress vs. Variation -- Part V
Feb. 19th, 2004 12:43 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
prof_pangaeaAn argument against "progress" and instead for INCREASING VARIATION in evolution, from Full House, by Stephen Jay Gould
5. Causality resides at the wall and in the spread of variation; the right tail is a consequence, not a cause.
The development of life's bell curve for a complexity through time does not represent a fully fully random phenomenon (though random elements play an important role). Two important causal influences shape the curve and it's changes -- but neither influence includes any statement about conventional progress. The two major causes are, first, necessasry origin at the left wall of minimal complexity; and, second, increase of numbers and kinds, with predictable development of a right-skewed distribution. Given this point of origin at a wall and subsequent increase of variation, the right tail almost had to develop and expand. But this expansion of the right tail -- the only (and myopic) source for any claim about progress -- is an epiphenomenon and a side consequences of the two causes listed above, not a fundamental thrust produced by the superiority of complex forms under natural selection. In fact, as the paradigm of the drunkard's walk* illustrates, such an extension of the right tail will occur in a regime of entirely random motion for each item, so long as the system begins at a wall. Thus, as the drunkard's walk shows in theory, and the evolution of planktonic forams confirms in fact, the expanding right tail of life's complexity may arise from random motion among all lineages. The vaunted progress of life is really random motion away from simple beginnings, not directed impetus toward inherently advantageous complexity.
*"The Drunkard's Walk" is merely an example used by Gould to illustrate how random movement can seem to have direction. A hypothetical drunkard exits a pub, and can only stagger in one of two directions -- along a sidewalk toward a gutter, or back to the wall of the pub, with a 50% chance of going in either direction with each stagger. He says it is certain that, eventually, the drunkard will end up in the gutter -- "If the drunkard hits the wall, he just stays there until a subsequent stagger propels him in the other direction. In other words, only one direction remains open for continuous advance -- toward the gutter." It is just another way of illustrating preferred result, as in coin-tossing. And again, it is completely random.
5. Causality resides at the wall and in the spread of variation; the right tail is a consequence, not a cause.
The development of life's bell curve for a complexity through time does not represent a fully fully random phenomenon (though random elements play an important role). Two important causal influences shape the curve and it's changes -- but neither influence includes any statement about conventional progress. The two major causes are, first, necessasry origin at the left wall of minimal complexity; and, second, increase of numbers and kinds, with predictable development of a right-skewed distribution. Given this point of origin at a wall and subsequent increase of variation, the right tail almost had to develop and expand. But this expansion of the right tail -- the only (and myopic) source for any claim about progress -- is an epiphenomenon and a side consequences of the two causes listed above, not a fundamental thrust produced by the superiority of complex forms under natural selection. In fact, as the paradigm of the drunkard's walk* illustrates, such an extension of the right tail will occur in a regime of entirely random motion for each item, so long as the system begins at a wall. Thus, as the drunkard's walk shows in theory, and the evolution of planktonic forams confirms in fact, the expanding right tail of life's complexity may arise from random motion among all lineages. The vaunted progress of life is really random motion away from simple beginnings, not directed impetus toward inherently advantageous complexity.
*"The Drunkard's Walk" is merely an example used by Gould to illustrate how random movement can seem to have direction. A hypothetical drunkard exits a pub, and can only stagger in one of two directions -- along a sidewalk toward a gutter, or back to the wall of the pub, with a 50% chance of going in either direction with each stagger. He says it is certain that, eventually, the drunkard will end up in the gutter -- "If the drunkard hits the wall, he just stays there until a subsequent stagger propels him in the other direction. In other words, only one direction remains open for continuous advance -- toward the gutter." It is just another way of illustrating preferred result, as in coin-tossing. And again, it is completely random.
