3 ms·

Embedding citations through images is an odd choice, but the biggest issue this article has is a complete dearth of discussion about mechanism. How are we meant

Embedding citations through images is an odd choice, but the biggest issue this article has is a complete dearth of discussion about mechanism. How are we meant to understand that agency influences genetics? What's the flow of genetic information in "genetic assimilation", and how is it any different from Lamarckism? Most tellingly, the example of the Galapagos finches doesn't explain exactly what is unique about those birds. If it's agency, then why isn't the same effect seen in other songbirds of similar brain size, as the citation mentions? Why do these birds not show the same varied adaptations to "goals"?

subanima 3y ago
The intended medium is the video at the top of the page. The page itself is just a way for me to show all my sources clearly. See this link which I also posted below for details on the mechanism of genetic assimilation: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12551-018-0403-x https://doi.org/10.1007/s12551-018-0403-x As I said in the video, the hypothesis for the finches is unproven. I simply wanted to show an interesting alternative theory that throws up some interesting questions.
- ivanbakel 3y ago
  >As I said in the video, the hypothesis for the finches is unproven. I simply wanted to show an interesting alternative theory that throws up some interesting questions. The trouble is that the example fails to be compelling. Why should the flexible stem of finches be in their agency, rather than their DNA (which might justify what set the finches apart from the other songbirds)? Why should we then start to ask questions about agency, when there's no strong reason to believe that agency at cause? There are lots of interesting questions in counterfactuals, but almost none are particularly worth thinking about scientifically. What do I about a world where agency influences evolution, given that there's no evidence that that world is this one?
  - subanima 3y ago
    Well, many people would simply disagree with you about what questions they want to think about and find compelling. E.g. https://www.biologicalpurpose.org/ https://www.biologicalpurpose.org/ or https://www.expandingpossibilities.org/ https://www.expandingpossibilities.org/

subanima 3y ago

The intended medium is the video at the top of the page. The page itself is just a way for me to show all my sources clearly. See this link which I also posted below for details on the mechanism of genetic assimilation: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12551-018-0403-x https://doi.org/10.1007/s12551-018-0403-x As I said in the video, the hypothesis for the finches is unproven. I simply wanted to show an interesting alternative theory that throws up some interesting questions.

ivanbakel 3y ago
>As I said in the video, the hypothesis for the finches is unproven. I simply wanted to show an interesting alternative theory that throws up some interesting questions. The trouble is that the example fails to be compelling. Why should the flexible stem of finches be in their agency, rather than their DNA (which might justify what set the finches apart from the other songbirds)? Why should we then start to ask questions about agency, when there's no strong reason to believe that agency at cause? There are lots of interesting questions in counterfactuals, but almost none are particularly worth thinking about scientifically. What do I about a world where agency influences evolution, given that there's no evidence that that world is this one?
- subanima 3y ago
  Well, many people would simply disagree with you about what questions they want to think about and find compelling. E.g. https://www.biologicalpurpose.org/ https://www.biologicalpurpose.org/ or https://www.expandingpossibilities.org/ https://www.expandingpossibilities.org/