Re: post from Holloway

H. M. Hubey (
27 Oct 1995 17:50:42 -0400 (Gerrit Hanenburg) writes:

>Brain mass/body mass?
>In that case,who do you think is higher up the scale,squirrel monkey or
>Homo sapiens?

Ok. OK. So I have to refine it. I didn't think you'd catch it.
YOu should have written about the European pygmy shrew too
while you were at it.

A minimum amount of brain mass is necessary for bodily functions
not having to much with intelligence as we think about it. That has to
be factored out. (that's probably a function of body_mass).

It's like in economics; fixed cost and variable cost. Once that's
done naturally we'll be at the top :-).. That's the way it
should be.

What's the problem anyway. This is getting boring.

>I think you are in error about this "moves towards" as the direction of
>evolution.It is only possible to speak of direction when you look back at
>certain lineages.A while ago somebody used the idea of a vector as a
>representation of direction.If you want to you use this metaphor in
>relation to evolution then evolution should be characterized by many
>vectors at the same time,pointing in different directions and constantly
>shifting directions in response to o.a.environmental changes.To pick just

It's a metaphor referring to the types of equations used by
geneticists and refers to the mathematical spaces.

>one of the vectors and call it *the* direction of evolution is
>arbitrary.(don't even think about adding them and call the resultant *the*
>direction of evolution,that would be stretching the metaphor)

Mutation is arbitrary. Selection says we're on top of the
food chain.

In a few hundred years the only mammals we'll allow to live
will be either our pets, live on farms or in zoos.


Regards, Mark