> I think it would be fairly shocking to find that something like dreaming would evolve in two species whose most recent common ancestor didn't dream. I don't

> I think it would be fairly shocking to find that something like dreaming would evolve in two species whose most recent common ancestor didn't dream. I don't see why. Our most recent common ancestor with wasps very likely had neither eyes nor legs, but we and wasps both have both of those. Perhaps it's more obvious why eyes and legs are of use to terrestrial animals who hunt by sight, than it is why dreams are of use to anyone - but why should the null hypothesis not be that a convergently evolved trait is adaptive and thus likely to be conserved?