[MOVED] The Extended Evolutionary Synthesis

VirOptimus · Dec 4, 2020

stevevw said:
That's because you haven't answered my questions. How is 'why I am touting the EES' or its importance to myself relevant to the validity of the EES.

I see, your refusal to answer is there for all to see.

stevevw · Dec 4, 2020

VirOptimus said:
I see, your refusal to answer is there for all to see.

No I am quite willing to answer but only on the proviso that you answer my questions. Fair is fair. Afterall I have asked these questions a few times and you seem to have avoided answering them which points to you having something to hide.

VirOptimus · Dec 4, 2020

stevevw said:
No I am quite willing to answer but only on the proviso that you answer my questions. Fair is fair. Afterall I have asked these questions a few times and you seem to have avoided answering them which points to you having something to hide.

I have actually answered it several times. Your reasons for your postings and agenda is important for us to understand you.

Especially as your arguments are very flawed and as you really cant write in an accademic language.

pitabread · Dec 4, 2020

stevevw said:
Well it looks like the mainstream literature doesn't have a proper conceptual understanding of evolution as they use the word variation interchangeably and out of context to mean different things.

...

Not at all what I was saying.

stevevw · Dec 4, 2020

VirOptimus said:
I have actually answered it several times. Your reasons for your postings and agenda is important for us to understand you.

Especially as your arguments are very flawed and as you really can't write in an academic language.

That's funny, If I cannot write in academic terms then how did I get my degree.

But that is not what I asked you. I asked you why knowing why I am touting the EES is relevant to the validity of the EES.
I guess you're going to say that you're not answering the proper question I asked was because I didn't explain things properly and that this is my fault. lol.

So to make it clear I am not asking why it is important for me to post about the EES. I am asking you how me telling you why I am posting about the EES is relevant to the validity of the EES itself.

stevevw · Dec 4, 2020

pitabread said:
...

Not at all what I was saying.

OK so what are you saying. From my understanding you were referring to the word 'variation' used in my exchange with speedwell, is that correct. Its proper meaning in 'context' which is based on understanding the science or facts around how the word is used.

In this case, I was pointing out that it seems that speedwell also used the word 'variation' in more than one context and this was inconsistent with the science just like he accused me of doing.

You said it was important to understand the context of the word and that understanding science helps understand the context.

I merely pointed out that it was the science that seemed to have caused the misunderstandings in context because it also used the word 'variation', inconsistently, and in more than one context.

I agree with you that context and understanding of the word factually are important. I was just pointing out that for our situation it wasn't simple as saying I was to blame for the misunderstandings as Speedwell also did the same thing as me and the source for the meaning of 'variation' also did the same thing which all contributeed to any misunderstanding.

VirOptimus · Dec 4, 2020

stevevw said:
That's funny, If I cannot write in academic terms then how did I get my degree.

But that is not what I asked you. I asked you why knowing why I am touting the EES is relevant to the validity of the EES.
I guess you're going to say that you're not answering the proper question I asked was because I didn't explain things properly and that this is my fault. lol.

So to make it clear I am not asking why it is important for me to post about the EES. I am asking you how me telling you why I am posting about the EES is relevant to the validity of the EES itself.

Its not, now answer.

stevevw · Dec 4, 2020

VirOptimus said:
Its not, now answer.

Then why the need to know something that is totally irrelevant to this thread. It won't add any positive contribution to the EES but rather be off-topic and will only derail the thread. Is that your aim to derail this thread? I would refer you to the following thread debate policy

Address only the content of the post and not the poster

Speedwell · Dec 4, 2020

stevevw said:
Then why the need to know something that is totally irrelevant to this thread. It won't add any positive contribution to the EES but rather be off-topic and will only derail the thread. Is that your aim to derail this thread? I would refer you to the following thread debate policy

Address only the content of the post and not the poster

The thing is, I'm getting bored with you trying to prove whatever your point is by reference to the same Nature article and that Royal Society paper over and over. You need something more recent, anyway. Try this.

Extended Evolutionary Synthesis: what is the debate about, and what might success for the extenders look like?

VirOptimus · Dec 4, 2020

stevevw said:
Then why the need to know something that is totally irrelevant to this thread. It won't add any positive contribution to the EES but rather be off-topic and will only derail the thread. Is that your aim to derail this thread? I would refer you to the following thread debate policy

Address only the content of the post and not the poster

Because its relevant to your posts.

Now answer.

stevevw · Dec 4, 2020

Speedwell said:
The thing is, I'm getting bored with you trying to prove whatever your point is by reference to the same Nature article and that Royal Society paper over and over. You need something more recent, anyway. Try this.

Extended Evolutionary Synthesis: what is the debate about, and what might success for the extenders look like?

Speedwell · Dec 4, 2020

stevevw said:
OK thanks, but it's behind a paywall. You obviously haven't been paying attention to the papers and articles I have been linking. I have linked around a dozen papers IE

How the EES differs from the Modern Synthesis
How the EES differs from the Modern Synthesis – Extended Evolutionary Synthesis
The Extended (Evolutionary) Synthesis Debate: Where Science Meets Philosophy
Extended (Evolutionary) Synthesis Debate: Where Science Meets Philosophy
Why an extended evolutionary synthesis is necessary
Why an extended evolutionary synthesis is necessary
Evolutionary biology today and the call for an extended synthesis
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsfs.2016.0145
Does the extended evolutionary synthesis entail extended explanatory power?
Does the extended evolutionary synthesis entail extended explanatory power?
Niche construction, microbiome transfers, and developmental bias are challenging the standard gene-centric view of how evolution works.
Putting the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis to the Test - John Templeton Foundation
Beyond DNA: integrating inclusive inheritance into an extended theory of evolution
Beyond DNA: integrating inclusive inheritance into an extended theory of evolution | Nature Reviews Genetics
A TVOL interview with philosopher Kim Sterelny: A conversation about the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis
A TVOL interview with philosopher Kim Sterelny: A conversation about the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis – Extended Evolutionary Synthesis
How adaptive plasticity evolves when selected against
How adaptive plasticity evolves when selected against
Understanding the role of plasticity in evolution
Understanding the role of plasticity in evolution – Extended Evolutionary Synthesis
The evolution of inclusive heredity through the genomic interactions of symbionts
Research projects – Extended Evolutionary Synthesis
Research project 10: Host adaptation via change in its microbiome
Research project 10: Host adaptation via change in its microbiome – Extended Evolutionary Synthesis
Niche construction
Niche construction
Project 13 Adaptation through niche construction and microbiome function in Onthophagus beetles
Adaptation through niche construction and microbiome function in Onthophagus beetles – Extended Evolutionary Synthesis
Project 14 An experimental test of plasticity-led evolution
An experimental test of plasticity-led evolution – Extended Evolutionary Synthesis
Scientists Seek to Update Evolution
https://www.quantamagazine.org/scientists-seek-to-update-evolution-20161122
The World's Top Biologists Have Met to Discuss Whether We Should Update Evolution
The World's Top Biologists Have Met to Discuss Whether We Should Update Evolution
The extended evolutionary synthesis: its structure, assumptions, and predictions
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2015.1019
Biases in the study of developmental bias
Error - Cookies Turned Off
Who’s afraid of the Extended Synthesis?
Who’s afraid of the Extended Synthesis? – Niche construction

I also provided a link to the EES site that holds dozens of papers based on the research done on the EES and other articles here
https://extendedevolutionarysynthesis.com/
This site also includes research projects areas the scientists are doing where each section has links to many other papers as well as blog posts IE
Conceptual issues
The EES in historical focusInfo
The EES in philosophical focusInfo
Evolutionary innovations
How evolution learns from experience Info
Developmental bias and the origin of adaptive variation Info
The role of developmental plasticity in innovation and diversification of Onthophagus beetles Info
Evolution and ontogeny of complex group adaptation Info
The origins of organismal complexity Info
Plasticity and house building in social insects Info
Inclusive inheritance
The evolution of inclusive heredity through the genomic interactions of symbionts Info
Adaptation through genes without change to the genome: host adaptation via change in its microbiome composition Info
Evolution of extra-genetic inheritance: a life-cycle perspective Info
Extra-genetic inheritance and adaptation to novel environments Info
Adaptation through niche construction and microbiome function in Onthophagus beetles Info
Evolutionary diversification
An experimental test of plasticity-led evolution Info
Plasticity and adaptive radiation in Anolis lizards Info
Phenotypic plasticity, developmental bias and evolutionary diversification in butterflies Info
Plasticity as a bridge between micro- and macroevolution Info
Adaptive trends and parallel evolution generated by niche construction Info
Niche construction, plasticity and the diversity of coral reef fauna Info
Niche construction and evolutionary diversity in experimental marine microbial communities Info
Macro-evolutionary dynamics of niche construction Info
Ecosystem networks and system-level functions Info
https://extendedevolutionarysynthesis.com/the-project/research-projects/

Sorry, it wasn't for me.

But let us stipulate, for purposes of argument, that we generally agree with all of those papers (and I haven't read all of them of course, but I assume, again for purposes of argument that they all have appeared in reputable peer-reviewed journals--no ID ringers--as we have generally agreed with all of the other legitimate papers you have posted,)

What is your point?

stevevw · Dec 4, 2020

Speedwell said:
Sorry, it wasn't for me.

But let us stipulate, for purposes of argument, that we generally agree with all of those papers (and I haven't read all of them of course, but I assume, again for purposes of argument that they all have appeared in reputable peer-reviewed journals--no ID ringers--as we have generally agreed with all of the other legitimate papers you have posted,)

What is your point?

In simple terms limiting our conception of evolution is a bad thing. The SET is limited in its explanations and science and therefore promoting the EES offers expanded explanations that can help increase the science and our understanding of evolution which is a good thing. As I have mentioned I am challenging some people's position on evolution especially on this forum where they take that limited view.

Despite people saying that the SET is incorporating the additional explanations from the EES, they are not as far as them acknowledging the EES forces as actual causes of evolution. That to me is taking a narrow view and is a misrepresentation of evolution which can lead to a misinformed view of evolution. I am simply challenging that view on scientific and philosophical grounds.

stevevw · Dec 4, 2020

VirOptimus said:
Because its relevant to your posts.

Now answer.

No it's not, my post is about the content of the EES, how it is conceptually different to the SET, and how that is a better way to scientifically understand the causes of evolution. You need to address that and not what my personal beliefs are about the EES. One is about the science for which the thread is about. The other is based on theology which this thread is not about and will not inform us on whether the EES is or is not a better way to understand evolution.

But for your information my reply to speedwell sort of answers to your question.

stevevw · Dec 4, 2020

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
No. It is filtering out the non-adaptive variations. Alternatively, it is the process by which you can tell which variations are adaptive. The variations happen regardless.

Still waiting for an answer to the question - how could natural selection possibly be the 'sole cause' of evolution? what does that even mean?

You would have to ask that question to the authors of the EES papers. Why would they express that statement over and over again. It's not just a matter of further context, they specifically make that statement about the SET. They then go into further reasoning as to why so the simple literature statement is a good reflection of what they further explain.

That is because primarily the SET has taken an adaptive view of evolution as Gould and Lewontin has explained back in the '70s and that view is still the dominant one today that guides people's view despite people saying it's not as the research from the EES on the mainstream literature shows that. An adaptive view or (adaptionism) claims that natural selection is the ultimate and only cause and driver of evolutionary change (how organisms survive by adapting to environments). All evolutionary explanations are geared around gradualism (how tiny changes/transitions) can evolve new features and creatures/species. I have already supported this but here

"The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme written by Stephen J. Gould and Richard C. Lewontin. The paper emphasizes issues with what the two authors call adaptationism or the adaptationist program as a framework to explain how species and traits evolved. According to Gould and Lewontin, the adaptationist program, each part of an organism had a particular shape due to the action of natural selection. Adaptationists created evolutionary stories without collecting any evidence about how traits actually evolved
Gould and Lewontin claim that Adaptationists see natural selection as the only and all-powerful force that can overcome any constraint to species' traits.
"The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme" (1979), by Stephen J. Gould and Richard C. Lewontin | The Embryo Project Encyclopedia

and here

Today’s mainstream evolutionary theory is generally “adaptationist” in that it invokes natural selection as either the only significant cause of evolution (adaptation) or at least its primary agent.
The middle way of evolution

VirOptimus · Dec 5, 2020

stevevw said:
No it's not, my post is about the content of the EES, how it is conceptually different to the SET, and how that is a better way to scientifically understand the causes of evolution. You need to address that and not what my personal beliefs are about the EES. One is about the science for which the thread is about. The other is based on theology which this thread is not about and will not inform us on whether the EES is or is not a better way to understand evolution.

But for your information my reply to speedwell sort of answers to your question.

Yeah, I know you are just a creationist.

FrumiousBandersnatch · Dec 5, 2020

stevevw said:
You would have to ask that question to the authors of the EES papers.

I'm asking you, because if you don't understand and can't explain what they mean, your use of it as a criticism of SET is valueless.

stevevw · Dec 5, 2020

VirOptimus said:
Yeah, I know you are just a creationist.

I thought a creationist only believes the universe and earth is 6,000 years old, that God supernaturally created life such as humans and all other living things as they appear today. That they dont support evolution or common decent. How could I be a creationists if I support evolution and common decent from a universal common ancestor. My position is more in line with theistic evolution.

stevevw · Dec 5, 2020

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
I'm asking you, because if you don't understand and can't explain what they mean, your use of it as a criticism of SET is valueless.

I may not understand evolution at the biologists level but as far as the differences in the core tenets, assumptions and structure between the EES and the SET I think I have a pretty good understanding. Basically the SET takes the adaptive view of evolutionary cause. Only natural selection causes adaptive evolution and therefore drives evolutionary change. Its a pretty easy concept to understand. Natural selection is the go to explanation for how creatures adapt to their environments and only random gene change is the process that creates variation for NS to act on.

That is oposed to the EES which includes a number of additional causes of adaptive evolution. There are additional forces such as developmental bias, niche construction, inheritence beyond genes and developmental plasticity that can produce well suited, and adaptive variations that enhance the fitness of creatures and their survival. These additional forces add additional mechanism that produce nonrandom variations including nongene changes and cause adaptative evolution besides the SET view of random gene variations acted upon by NS.

The expanded view gives more explanatory power compared to the SET and can therefore account better for what we have been discovering in recent years through genomics, developmental biology, epigenetics, ecology and social sciences. Though the SET claims that they have incorporated the EES influences they havent included them as actual causes of evolution. So its a difference in the concept of how evolution works which can lead to different scientific assumptions and predictions that will inform research.

Speedwell · Dec 5, 2020

stevevw said:
In simple terms limiting our conception of evolution is a bad thing. The SET is limited in its explanations and science and therefore promoting the EES offers expanded explanations that can help increase the science and our understanding of evolution which is a good thing. As I have mentioned I am challenging some people's position on evolution especially on this forum where they take that limited view.

You have accused people of taking such a limited view, even when they have not. They may have appeared to you to have done so, but read what you just wrote: Everybody here agrees that "EES offers expanded explanations that can help increase the science and our understanding of evolution which is a good thing."
The only real issue is the degree to which Modern Syntheses needs to be restructured in order to accommodate the findings of EES. This is an ongoing discussion within the field of evolutionary biology. I for one, am content to let the experts in the field work it out. I am certainly not going to anticipate the outcome based the the ramblings of some random guy on the internet who doesn't really seem to know all that much about it.

Despite people saying that the SET is incorporating the additional explanations from the EES, they are not as far as them acknowledging the EES forces as actual causes of evolution.

Some people, maybe. My reading of the situation is that it is mostly a misunderstanding due to us not devoting as much time and energy as you think you are owed, to figure out what you are talking about.

That to me is taking a narrow view and is a misrepresentation of evolution which can lead to a misinformed view of evolution. I am simply challenging that view on scientific and philosophical grounds.

How selfless of you. And when you are done you can go teach your grandma to suck eggs.

[MOVED] The Extended Evolutionary Synthesis

A nihilist who cares.

inquisitive

A nihilist who cares.

Well-Known Member

inquisitive

inquisitive

A nihilist who cares.

inquisitive

Well-Known Member

A nihilist who cares.

inquisitive

Well-Known Member

inquisitive

inquisitive

inquisitive

A nihilist who cares.

Well-Known Member

inquisitive

inquisitive

Well-Known Member

Similar threads