History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Evolution and Big Data

November 8th, 2014 · No Comments

If you study the macro effect in WHEE you will begin to appreciate the way that evolutionary sequences are ‘Big Data’ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_data, no ‘Super Big Data’: consider the evolutionary stream from land animal to whales: we can track the basic sequence, but we can’t explain it. At least in the sense of physics where the physicist accounts for the masses of objects over time. He may be lucky, say, compute the center of gravity of an object and track it that way. That’s a useful example: in biology the object is entirely anomalous. Its evolutionary ‘coordinates’ don’t compute at all. You can’t just wave a wand and say natural selection ’caused’ this long sequence from land animal to whale.
The macro effect enforces this kind of thinking because its ‘objects’, civilizations, don’t even have significant boundaries. They seem to evolve via transient intervals of innovation, and co-evolved by the free agents inside them. There are many more complications like this. And unfortunately the evolution of man is closer to the civilization example than to the organism example. Man comes into being with a ‘culture’, and his evolution is that of his ‘organism’ and also its relationships with a species. But wait, wasn’t evolution always like that?

So the approach of WHEE is a small step in a new direction. To be still enforcing darwinism at this point means either that science is a totalitarian ideology being enforced for social reasons or that scientists are completely stupid. I think Darwin was a mixture of both (plus his plagiarism from Wallace) and natural selection foots the bill for an ideology.

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment