[ Follow Ups ]
Posted by John Brady on October 31, 1999 at 00:57:49:
In Reply to: Re: The Evolution of Pattern-Pools posted by Sergei on October 29, 1999 at 13:24:17:
Thanks Sergei. I would certainly prefer your "unsolicited preprint" / "peer review" approach rather than me polishing up a paper - the reason for such a long post was that my only genetics is Biology 101, what I read in the popular press, and scanning about 30 pages of Dawkin's The Blind Watchmaker to try to check that I wasn't completely wasting folks' time. (Plus my wife would prefer that I get back to paying the bills with my day job in I.T., rather than teaching myself Genetics 1, 2, & 3++.)
Before we proceed, does existing science cover my hypothesis's prediction that the incidence of heroic baboons would almost bounce back? If so then this hypothesis is just an interesting application of known science. But *if* known mechanisms don't explain heroic incidence bounce-back, and *if* this hypothesis tests true (which I reckon is likely, as per reasons in my post), then we would have a new mechanism of evolution???!!! (I hate the thought of adding a new mechanism, but then again it's a single simple addition, and I get the impression that altruism theory is currently a mess of exceptions.)
Re testing this hypothesis, can anyone suggest a species with a very short life-span that demonstrates social altruism and is cheap to keep?
I'd also love to know:
* Is my post's stuff on gene-pool R&D budget currently used by ecologists?
* Do biologists agree with my post's assertion that death is adaptive? (This
simple idea hasn't made it to any popular press that I've seen.)
* Should any publication have my post's more speculative stuff on the 'kingdom
evolution' explaining mortality etc? (btw, mass extinction events like the
Yucutan comet would have somewhat re-newed the selective forces on a
pattern-pool's ability to fill wide-open niches.)
I'm wincing with embarassment and itching with curiosity here. Please put me
out of my misery one way or another.
Since my post I found an article by David Sloan Wilson & Elliott Sober at http://www.socio.ch/evo/sobwil.html titled RE-INTRODUCING GROUP SELECTION TO THE HUMAN BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES, and interesting reviews at amazon.com of their book 'Unto Others'. Wilson's first half is an impressive review of how biologists rejected evolution at group level for 2 decades. (Sober then does more philosophical stuff on human society that I have only skimmed.) I'm not qualified to judge, but if a reader's ideas are shaped by Williams, Dawkins et al circa 1985, then perhaps they need to consider Wilson & Sobers' article / book. Wilson's' description of "unified theory of natural selection" seems to be a super-set of the "pattern-pool evolution" I had posted. However, I don't have enough genetics to judge their outlined mechanisms for altruism, let alone check if their mechanisms cover my hypothesis's prediction that the incidence of heroic baboons would almost bounce back.
Also since my post, I've explored the web re
evolution, and now realise how many ideas are out there competing for
attention. Many of these ideas seem to be sponsored by their authors as part of
their academic career. I haven't time or ability to sponor this one, and it
might be rapidly judged by geneticists who have been trained to shoot at sight
any group selection theory that raises its ugly head. So feel free to use these
ideas as you see fit.