Re: Evolution, "adaptation", and what's currently adaptive

Len Piotrowski (lpiotrow@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu)
Wed, 4 Sep 1996 14:00:05 GMT

In article <504n6q$qjs@argo.unm.edu> mycol1@unm.edu (Bryant) writes:

>[snip]

>OK-doke. I would like to see a reference someday (from anybody)
>demonstrating that a culture exists in which sexual jealousy is unknown,
>but that's a tangent.

It's a central problem to your thesis of a functional adaptationist
explanation for a human behavior. Do babies in your family display
jealousy?

>>>The neuropeptide causing
>>>the sensation of thirst has been identified (and, therefore, you would
>>>presumably agree that there are relevant genes for selection to have
>>>acted upon were thirst somehow evolutionarily adventageous).
>>
>>I can't figure out what your saying here. A neuropeptide causes the
>>"sensation" of thirst. Where does it "cause" this sensation, where does it
>>come from, and how is it produced and transmitted? (Excuse me for my ignorance
>>of this esoterica).

>I will respond at length, and carefully, after my approaching phys class.Ok?

The central problem I am interested in is the relationship between a
neuropeptide and human behavior?

>>>That neuropeptide is a "physical object" by your accounting, yes?
>>
>>I take your word for it.

>Lenny, unless organic chemistry is an exercise in metaphysics,
>nueropeptides count as physical entities. :)

Unless I become an organic chemist, I'll have to take your word for it, capice?

Cheers,

--Lenny__