Quote:
Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick  Evolution can be seen as a simple pulse of ever expanding consciousness,leading to and eventually beyond the self aware stage we are now at.
regards michael. |
Nice reply Michael .... but
specifically in this thread I would like to establish which is the more current understanding of evolution:
1 .. Evolution is random (that is DNA is replicated with random mutations and passed on)
2 .. Evolution is Lamarckian. A now defunct theory but now slightly resurrected in the early 21st century.
From the WIKI
Quote:
Lamarck based his theory on two observations, in his day considered to be generally true:- Use and disuse – Individuals lose characteristics they do not require (or use) and develop characteristics that are useful.
- Inheritance of acquired traits – Individuals inherit the traits of their ancestors.
Examples of Lamarckism would include:- Giraffes stretching their necks to reach leaves high in trees (especially Acacias), strengthen and gradually lengthen their necks. These giraffes have offspring with slightly longer necks (also known as "soft inheritance").
- A blacksmith, through his work, strengthens the muscles in his arms. His sons will have similar muscular development when they mature.
With this in mind, Lamarck had developed two laws:- In every animal which has not passed the limit of its development, a more frequent and continuous use of any organ gradually strengthens, develops and enlarges that organ, and gives it a power proportional to the length of time it has been so used; while the permanent disuse of any organ imperceptibly weakens and deteriorates it, and progressively diminishes its functional capacity, until it finally disappears.
- All the acquisitions or losses wrought by nature on individuals, through the influence of the environment in which their race has long been placed, and hence through the influence of the predominant use or permanent disuse of any organ; all these are preserved by reproduction to the new individuals which arise, provided that the acquired modifications are common to both sexes, or at least to the individuals which produce the young.
|
Charles Darwin (it appears ... citation needed) did not entirely rule out the idea of neo-lamarckianism ... which means that environmental influences can alter the state of our DNA.
cool bananas ... greg
