Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!caip!nike!styx!lll-crg!lll-lcc!pyramid!pesnta!valid!pete
From: pete@valid.UUCP (Pete Zakel)
Newsgroups: net.bio,net.origins,net.philosophy
Subject: Re: the Goal of evolution
Message-ID: <267@valid.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 7-May-86 23:49:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: valid.267
Posted: Wed May  7 23:49:54 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 10-May-86 23:25:35 EDT
References: <487@bcsaic.UUCP> <1002@cybvax0.UUCP>
Organization: Valid Logic, San Jose, CA
Lines: 27
Xref: linus net.bio:305 net.origins:3056 net.philosophy:4873

> In article <318@dg_rtp.UUCP> throopw@dg_rtp.UUCP writes:
> >>>[...] An entity
> >>>must have understanding to have goals.  Evolution has no understanding,
> >>>and hence is a goal-less process.
> 
> Let me change the semantics here a bit.  "Evolution" per se has no goals;
> but I think it makes sense to say that the species which are evolving  do
> have a goal: to survive.  (And the individuals of the species have the more
> complex goal of perpetuating their genes.)
> 
> Frank Adams

I wish to disagree with this statement.  Survival is not a goal, it is a
process.  DNA that survives gives rise to DNA that is good at surviving.
Species that survive and perpetuate their genes give rise to species that
are good at surviving and perpetuating their genes.  Their is no "goal".
When conditions change such that a certain survival process does not work,
species depending on that process die out.  Species that use a survival
process that works under both set of conditions survive.  This is called
"natural selection" and is the basis of evolution.

Describing a process as goal oriented makes explanation easier, but the
explanation should not be confused with the reality.  This type of confusion
is what gave rise to Lamarck's (spelling?) theories (you know: if you cut
off the tails of enough mice, eventually you will breed tail-less mice).
-- 
-Pete Zakel (..!{hplabs,amd,pyramid,ihnp4}!pesnta!valid!pete)