|
|
Re: Evolution, "adaptation", and what's currently adaptive
Bryant (mycol1@unm.edu)
29 Aug 1996 14:37:24 -0600
In article <lpiotrow.388.3224993B@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
Len Piotrowski <lpiotrow@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> wrote:
>In article <501i8n$3bcg@argo.unm.edu> mycol1@unm.edu (Bryant) writes:
>>>You haven't identified an adaptation, so I guess you've lost the bet. Their
>>>"fitness effects" are only asserted.
[snip]
>They are just-so-stories.
I've gotten this msg twice, probably due to a glitch here at UNM.
Anyway, I thought it over and decided that you're probably correct; I was
too quick to jump to specific examples that were new to me rather than
sticking to argument from principle.
Ironically, I picked jealousy and sugar craving as crude, "common-sense"
examples to illustrate a point, and didn't intend to end up defending
adaptationist perspectives of these phenomena!
But that's what I ended up doing, nevertheless. Live and learn.
I should have said, "if we accept that X and Y are evolved traits," they
still need not be currently adaptive (my original point, I believe).
Bryant
|