From: J. R. Molloy (jr@shasta.com)
Date: Sun Jan 06 2002 - 09:19:00 MST
From: "Phil Osborn" <philosborn@altavista.com>
<<There was also an sf short story from many years before that, in which a
medical research scientist discovers how to prevent cellular dieoff, and then
suddenly realizes to her horror that she has just ensured that she will get
cancer.>>
That would be horrible for sure... bad enough to have incurable cancer, but to
have incurable cancer and not be able to escape via death would be the
ultimate torture.
<<species require a genetic turnover in order to shift to adapt to changing
environments. If the turnover rate is too low, the species becomes extinct.>>
Species with short life cycles can evolve more quickly, thus ensuring their
survival as the species adapts to changing environments. This is offset to
some degree by the benefits that longer life affords to groups and communities
in terms of acquired experience and expertise.
<<The answer I always got to this line of argument, from the LE gurus of the
60's & 70's was that evolution only selected via individuals>>
But of course that's not true, because evolution selects via species too,
otherwise dinosaurs would still be alive, and could reproduce with the birds
that evolved from them.
--- --- --- --- ---
Useless hypotheses, etc.:
consciousness, phlogiston, philosophy, vitalism, mind, free will, qualia,
analog computing, cultural relativism, GAC, Cyc, Eliza, cryonics, individual
uniqueness, ego, human values, scientific relinquishment, malevolent AI,
non-sensory experience, SETI
We move into a better future in proportion as science displaces superstition.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:33 MST