In the Darwin’s own statement that is in OP, he says that natural selection was the primary process but not the only one. But TOE does not also propose that sentience arose naturally.
I will read the link at leisure.
Last edited:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Darwin's Pain
- Thread starter atanu
- Start date
In the Darwin’s own statement that is in OP, he says that natural selection was the primary process but not the only one. But TOE does not also propose that sentience arose naturally.
I will read the link at leisure.
I don't understand the context from where u are coming from. What has TOE to do with consciousness?
Yerda
Veteran Member
There is apparently a bit of a squabble going on around the role of natural selection: About the EES - Extended Evolutionary Synthesis
Science in flux: is a revolution brewing in evolutionary theory? | Aeon Essays
Science in flux: is a revolution brewing in evolutionary theory? | Aeon Essays
I am pointing to ‘Origin of life’ opposed to ‘Origin of species’.
Thank you. Excellent links. And truly significant. It remains to be seen whether it turns out a fluke or not.
In my understanding science leads the revolutions — paradigm changes, expanding frontiers of understanding. But effects come a long time later due to mental inertia.
Last edited:
Hard to say. I'm not sure Darwin was aware of gene drift back in his day, but he was aware of -- and he actually wrote about in at least one of his books -- sexual selection, which should not be confused with natural selection.
Well, dang! Ya beat me to it!
That has nothing to do with evolution through natural selection or with anything in evolutionary biology. It's done by separate scientific field of biochemistry.
I know that. I am thinking of perception.
Misconceptions about evolution
You will find that that TOE is about ‘Origin of Life’ is the first misconception listed.
Therefore?
In what way is a meteor strike a kind or category of selection mechanism on the same order as natural selection, sexual selection, genetic drift, etc/
Hey. There is more to therefore.
That is my question, but I think such a natural disaster would have led to large drift.
I found the context. @columbus was mainly correct.
Charles Darwin quote Great is the power of steady misrepresentation - medium image 500 x 350 px
Charles Darwin quote Great is the power of steady misrepresentation - medium image 500 x 350 px
Who knows. Maybe he was only attempting (apparently in vain) to appease the proto-Creationists of his day. Maybe he never stopped being a proto-creationist himself.
As for the later questions, how much of an understanding of the current state of biology are we to allow Darwin? It all comes down to that.
Stretch the boundaries enough and even mutation is natural selection. That's not what is meant though.
Yes. I want also to understand whether sexual selection comes under the ambit of natural selection?
His belief in God at the time he wrote his seminal works is pretty well established, no matter the movement later.
In a simple sense, he seemed to belief in a very basic form of creationism then guided by evolutionary processes, moreso than God.
Hard to tell for sure, but there'd be plenty of scientists involved in evolutionary studies to this day with that type of belief, I would think.
I would think so.
Nah. Natural selection occurs due changing natural conditions. Short term events like volcanism, epidemics and meteor strikes certainly count as well.