|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 61 (9209 total) |
| |
The Rutificador chile | |
Total: 919,507 Year: 6,764/9,624 Month: 104/238 Week: 21/83 Day: 0/4 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Who Owns the Standard Definition of Evolution | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
K.Rose Member Posts: 160 From: Michigan Joined: |
Can anyone provide a concise definition of Evolution, one that would find concurrence amongst most/all serious evolutionists, and one against which all descriptions of Evolution should be calibrated? "Natural selection" and "survival of the fittest" are woefully lacking, of course, and explanations of evolution that require an essay or a book lose focus of the fundamental mechanics of evolution. Two or three sentences, perhaps a paragraph, should be enough to provide an overall but thorough definition.
I suspect that the everyday layman's nebulous understanding of Evolution can be summed up by Zallinger's "March of Progress", sadly, and until there is a standard definition to which all can refer the Evolution debate will meander pointlessly.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13108 From: EvC Forum Joined: |
Thread copied here from the Who Owns the Standard Definition of Evolution thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9583 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 6.6
|
The most widely accepted definition of evolution among scientists is the gradual change in heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations, driven by natural selection, genetic drift, mutation, and gene flow. It is the process by which species adapt to their environments and diverge from common ancestors over time.
The general public's understanding of evolution can vary, but a commonly accepted definition is the idea that species change over time through a process of natural selection, leading to the development of new species from ancestral ones. However, there are also varying degrees of acceptance and understanding among different segments of the population, with some holding alternative beliefs or misconceptions about the concept. There you go. Took about a minute. Thanks Chat GPT.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 6.1
|
Are we going to have some troll time now?
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
K.Rose Member Posts: 160 From: Michigan Joined: |
Thank you, Tangle.
I won't disagree with your first couple of sentences, but I'm looking for a more technically-based definition. Something like: 1. The first life form sprang forth from non-living matter.2. All life-forms have developed from this first life form. 3. Successive, more complex life forms developed over great periods of time due to random, non-directed mutations. 4. Inferior mutations disappeared due to the observable process of natural selection, or survival-of-the-fittest, while the more robust mutations continued evolving. 5. The succession of ever-more complex, adaptable mutations has thus far resulted in the highest life form, modern man. 6. Evolution continues today. This is my own hi-level understanding of Evolution. I welcome any corrections/improvements.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22953 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 6.9 |
Abiogenesis isn't part of the theory of evolution.
2. All life-forms have developed from this first life form. This is a possible implication but not part of the theory itself.
3. Successive, more complex life forms developed over great periods of time due to random, non-directed mutations. Increasing complexity is a possible outcome of evolutionary forces like competition and differential reproductive success but is not part of the theory itself.
4. Inferior mutations disappeared due to the observable process of natural selection, or survival-of-the-fittest, while the more robust mutations continued evolving. Close enough.
5. The succession of ever-more complex, adaptable mutations has thus far resulted in the highest life form, modern man. All life is a product of evolution. "Highest life form" isn't a scientific term, but it would be accurate to say that humans are an extremely successful species that inhabits a very broad range of environments.
6. Evolution continues today. Yes. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9583 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 6.6
|
K.Rose writes: I'm looking for a more technically-based definition. Something like: ... Ah, sorry, you're in the wrong shop, try next door.Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine. "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17919 Joined: Member Rating: 6.6
|
People get confused about the meaning of “random” in this context. We had one poster here who got it wrong and accused scientists of gross dishonesty over it. (Creationists love accusing others and hate admitting fault). There are biases in the process and some people think that means “non-random” (although that’s wrong too).
Undirected is better. Maybe it needs expanding to deal with complications - but then you get into explaining stuff like the SOS response
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6484 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 9.1
|
You are unlikely to get that. I'll give my personal comments. Others may have different points of disagreement. 1. Evolution and Origin of life are to separate things. There could have been origin of life without evolution. Or life might have always existed in some form. It is generally agreed that origin of life has not been explained. 2. Again, this is too simplistic. We do not have a good definition of what we mean by "life". It is conceivable that it all started with some chemical reactions that we would not consider to be life, but might have been a precursor to life. Precursors to life could have originated multiple times, and what see as life today could result from several different precursors. 3. We don't have a good definition of "more complex". 4. It isn't clear what "inferior" means here. Whether a mutation is beneficial depends on the environment. A succession of changes in the environment may have been an important driver of evolution. 5. Again, we have a difficulty with "complex". And we have a difficulty with "highest life form". It is not clear what those terms would mean. 6. Hooray -- I can agree with this one.Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member (Idle past 133 days) Posts: 4001 From: Adirondackia Joined: |
Theodoric writes: Are we going to have some troll time now? I'm staking a claim to the Standard Definition of Evolution (copyright pending). Nobody else has. It's mine. Every time a creationist uses the term, i.e., abuses it, ka-ching! Where reason fails, pain might work."If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads." Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4597 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 9.1
|
I have always liked RAZD's definitions of evolution.
Message 7RAZD: Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned! What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that it has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --Percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
K.Rose Member Posts: 160 From: Michigan Joined: |
Thank you all for your input.
We could conceivably define Evolution by agreeing on all of the things that Evolution is not, but it seems there should be a readily available concise definition. Maybe one that is maintained by some accepted authority on Evolution? Is there such an authority? I suppose there will always be disagreement on some of the finer details, but to whom/what can we appeal to reconcile some of the more fundamental aspects of Evolution, e.g., what is random/complex/inferior/life/etc.?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8654 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 6.6
|
Can anyone provide a concise definition of Evolution, one that would find concurrence amongst most/all serious evolutionists, and one against which all descriptions of Evolution should be calibrated? No. There is a very consistent set of definitions across the discipline but no one definition is cut into the marble and etched in gold. Read Ernst W. Mayr. Learn that name. He has defined evolution many times in many ways.
... but I'm looking for a more technically-based definition. Why? You looking for something to rant and rail against?
This is my own hi-level understanding of Evolution. As you can see from the responses your understanding leaves a lot still to be learned. Understanding evolution at anything but the pop-culture soundbite level takes years of study. Takes a lot of work to understand the numerous processes involved in biological evolution. Most on here have been at this for decades. What do you hope to learn, find, achieve with this question? How can we help?Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4597 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 9.1
|
K.Rose in Message 12 writes: but it seems there should be a readily available concise definition. Maybe one that is maintained by some accepted authority on Evolution? Why does it seem there should be, to you? Can you point to a single "accepted authority" on the other major scientific fields? Why should there be one for biology?
Is there such an authority? I suppose there will always be disagreement on some of the finer details, but to whom/what can we appeal to reconcile some of the more fundamental aspects of Evolution, e.g., what is random/complex/inferior/life/etc.? Many universities offer series of courses that cover biological evolution and there have been many textbooks written on the subject. You want a few simple sentences to define one of the most complex processes in nature. How would a more detailed, simpler definition be more useful than those already provided? It's interesting that biologist seem to be able to communicate just fine using the definitions we already have and are not clambering for "better definitions."Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned! What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python One important characteristic of a theory is that it has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --Percy The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9489 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 6.1 |
Wrong
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024