Sexual preference in evolution allows for animals to choose features that the mates find preferable in their spouces to be. An example would be the bright colors in birds that while attact mates also make them more observable to preditors.
I believe this is an example of Free choice among the animal kingdom and would take it a step futher and say simple preference can be a driver in evolution and preference or choice is available to all life.
For example Plants like the rose use certain chemicals from the ground. My take would be that they have a preference for how the chemicals taste or perhaps how easy or hard it is to get that chemical. Now I provide coffee grounds for my roses. A specific chemical in the coffee grounds is attractive to some of my roses. These Roses bloosom extraordinary. This plants seeds produce plants that a higher percentage do better in coffee grounds. Now if coffee grounds are available over multiple generations you will eventually get a new species that developes with an actual need for coffee grounds. This was a plants choice not caused.
If we go to animals. The fox for instance may decide it likes to eat chimpmunks. There are plenty of squirels or rabits but it likes the color, the chase or maybe the taste. As long as there are chimpmunks this fox will eat them. Animals like humans group with similarites. This fox finds a mate that also prefers to eat chimpmunks. There offspring would have a greater desire to eat chimpmunks. If chimpmunks are available over the generations the fox should eventually develop into another spieces suited to hunt and eat chimpmunks. Again a simple choice developing into a new species.
Inconclusion for evolution to work life has to be about choice. The ability to choose a path either for survival or preference. There are several experiments with mice and plants that support this argument in part. I took liberties to expand the concept.
I believe this is an example of Free choice among the animal kingdom and would take it a step futher and say simple preference can be a driver in evolution and preference or choice is available to all life.
For example Plants like the rose use certain chemicals from the ground. My take would be that they have a preference for how the chemicals taste or perhaps how easy or hard it is to get that chemical. Now I provide coffee grounds for my roses. A specific chemical in the coffee grounds is attractive to some of my roses. These Roses bloosom extraordinary. This plants seeds produce plants that a higher percentage do better in coffee grounds. Now if coffee grounds are available over multiple generations you will eventually get a new species that developes with an actual need for coffee grounds. This was a plants choice not caused.
If we go to animals. The fox for instance may decide it likes to eat chimpmunks. There are plenty of squirels or rabits but it likes the color, the chase or maybe the taste. As long as there are chimpmunks this fox will eat them. Animals like humans group with similarites. This fox finds a mate that also prefers to eat chimpmunks. There offspring would have a greater desire to eat chimpmunks. If chimpmunks are available over the generations the fox should eventually develop into another spieces suited to hunt and eat chimpmunks. Again a simple choice developing into a new species.
Inconclusion for evolution to work life has to be about choice. The ability to choose a path either for survival or preference. There are several experiments with mice and plants that support this argument in part. I took liberties to expand the concept.