3 ms·
Evolution is romanticized, but its ability are limited, not infinite. The more complex a species, the less adaptivity it has to fundamental shifts in environme
by koheripbal 6y ago
Evolution is romanticized, but its ability are limited, not infinite.
The more complex a species, the less adaptivity it has to fundamental shifts in environmental pressures. The interconnections between protein functions are directly responsible for that trade-off, and become a liability.
The time scales for evolution far beyond our current level of genetic complexity, probably extend beyond the life span of the Earth.
Now the benefit of this speghetti-code situation is that no intelligent designer is required - obviously a fundamental ingredient of abiogenesis, but does it benefit an species that's capable of genetic editing?
Nope. At this point, it's really just a bottleneck to even repairing the most straight-forward genetic diseases.
As a species, we're approaching the time where we've obviated evolution. ...I won't say we've seen that yet because reproduction rates are still very uneven across population segments, but it's only a matter of a few more generations (cataclysms not withstanding).
- youareostriches 6y ago>As a species, we're approaching the time where we've obviated evolution. This is hubris. Everything that humanity may accomplish in the future, from editing its own genome to creating general artificial intelligence, is a product of that same evolutionary process. We do all that out of our innate need for self preservation and reproduction—evolutionary imperatives for all organisms. But it’s more accurate to think of evolution as a universal computational process occurring within the substrate of (bio)chemistry. That computation will yield further computation (intelligence and its products).
- TeMPOraL 6y agoThis way you can define evolution to mean absolutely anything, at which point the word loses its meaning. If we stick to traditional, useful definition of biological evolution, then we can confidently say that it stopped being the driving force for plant and animal life no later than when we've first learned to communicate and remember ideas; we've made it irrelevant when we've learned to write. It still works on microscale, but that's mostly because things breed and die faster at that scale, there's more of it, and we can't efficiently poke at it with any sort of precision.
- antepodius 6y agoEh, you could argue evolution is still relevant in human populations up till today.
- nwienert 6y agoIt’s not spaghetti code... I just think your analogy is weak and misleading. Not sure how you’re defining complex but humans pretty soundly refute that adaptability thing. It’s not a “bottleneck” it’s just... life. Can you point to an animal anywhere near as successful as humans that doesn’t have.. genetic variability? No. It’s a requirement and precondition for our success, not some flaw we overcame despite.
- undersuit 6y agoWhat's your definition of success?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- orestarod 6y agoTo exist.
- TeMPOraL 6y agoExistence is table stakes. All interesting things happen on top of it.
- esperent 6y agoNonetheless, it's a very freeing view to consider that just by existing you've already succeeded. Everything that comes after is an adventure. You've already beaten far, far greater odds just by being here than anything you'll accomplish in life.
- perfmode 6y agois there a greater mystery than existence itself?
- antepodius 6y ago