Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id BAA05988 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 5 Feb 2001 01:41:29 GMT Subject: Re: Evolution of ontogeny Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 20:38:52 -0500 x-sender: wsmith1@camail2.harvard.edu x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, Claritas Est Veritas From: "Wade T.Smith" <wade_smith@harvard.edu> To: "Memetics Discussion List" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Message-ID: <20010205013705.AAA9513@camailp.harvard.edu@[204.96.32.103]> Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Hi Mark Mills --
>Memetics hopes to provide a framework for cultural evolution, so is it fair
>to say most here think the environment evolves?
The environment changes. All change is not evolution, although evolution
is always change. So, no, from this particular corpus of molecules, it is
not thought that the environment evolves. Life needs to evolve to survive
in changing environments.
>What about ontogeny (the development cycle)? Does it evolve? The
>neural-meme may be an ontogenetic feature or developmental structure. Do
>these evolve?
The developmental cycle may indeed evolve, although we have had no
evidence that it has. (Except, perhaps, _perhaps_- although I ain't
convinced- in the recent advent of earlier puberty in females. This could
be a normal developmental function, altered only temporally by diet.)
And we have had no evidence so far that the human being has evolved over
the last 50 or so millennia....
But lots and lots of history to mandate that we haven't.
- Wade
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 05 2001 - 01:43:24 GMT