Learning Evolution

@CopperCicada Thanks for your answer. In looking at your response the importance of words and their various applications becomes even more important to me than expected.


There's that word adaptability again. It's pretty straightforward, but for some reason it sounds off an alarm. I think that's because to me, adapt means conscious effort. Well, reactionary. An animal learns and adapts, for example.

Define phenotype: the set of observable characteristics of an individual resulting from the interaction of its genotype with the environment.

So, they don't adapt as I describe above. Phenotypes don't adapt in that sense. Evolution isn't a change, a conscious learning in order to maximize survivability. It's random change with both negative and positive possibilities, correct?


Why not? Because those wouldn't result in what? Are mutations beneficial? Dobzhansky on Drosophila melanogaster comes to mind. Now I don't want to get too deep into that just yet, but perhaps scratch the surface a little?

@AkioTsukino

Inaccurate.
You've already acknowledged that evolution doesn't describe a conscious engagement of any kind.

The change is random but the selection process is not.

@Pikachu
Okay.


Yes, I have. I'm trying to work linguistically through a field I'm not conversant in. Remember, this isn't a debate. So, adapt and select would suggest to me one thing in that field and possibly another outside that field. Outside of evolution adapt means to consciously learn, select means make a conscious choice.

Uh, let's see. A simile in a context I am more familiar with, molecular biology. To isolate something, outside of that field, in a more common vernacular outside that field, means something is separate; far away; alone. In molecular biology, however, it means to grow a virus in the lab. So you can't call a virus make any claims of it until you isolate it. A virus, of course, doesn't multiply on its own. That's why it invades a host. To multiply. You can't isolate a virus unless you have a host. So, they will typically say "There's no such thing as isolation of a virus!" thinking it has to be separated from the host.

So, I have to may have to make a necessary distinction between - lots of stuff, apparently, lots of words - adapt and select, evolution, et cetera.


I don't think I understand. Explain?

@AkioTsukino


I mean that's fine...but i think the term has been sufficiently clarified in this context an you've acknowledged that you understand the meaning in the context of evolution.


No point in repeating it here. See my "rolling dice" explanation which is chronologically after this one😉

@Pikachu
Even if that were the case, and I don't think it necessarily is, obviously, but even if it were that doesn't mean I just accept it blindly. Let's say in the research or in another response from someone else I come across a discrepancy. I want to investigate that even if I have acknowledged and understand the meaning in context of evolution.

@AkioTsukino
You don't have to accept it blindly. But you haven't raised any specific objection.
Do you have any specific objection to the definition of adaptation in an evolutionarily context being a process which does not require conscious effort?
If not then to what are you objecting and why do you keep bringing it up?

@Pikachu
Alright then. Good.


Nope. Don't think so.


Like I said. The potential for linguistic abuse. Confusion.