What about aphantasia? Is not being able to visualise, good or bad - according to Evolution?

[Gottservant]

Hi there,

So I really want to understand, how this works: take Aphantasia (the inability to visualise), which selection pressures influence whether it is a good or bad thing? Is someone who can't visualize freer to adapt? Or does it force Evolution to reboot - a bad thing? I mean if you believe it once, and then you get aphantasia, you have to re-cognise Evolution again, to get the most out of it?

Does this lead to something other than Evolution, or do the rules of Evolution force adaptation to start again in the exact same way?

I mean it either has a corporate effect, or it doesn't, right? Which one flourishes more?

 

[Gottservant]

I have to admit, I would be tempted to tilt 'Evolution' into a more banal interpretation, on the basis of your answer to this?

Just declaring my bias, that's all.

 

[Lawrence87]

Given that it seems people's ability to visualise varies greatly it could be neutral. It has no impact on survival.

 

[Gottservant]

Given that it seems people's ability to visualise varies greatly it could be neutral. It has no impact on survival.

Yes, but if someone can visualize Evolution and another cannot, surely you would argue that the one who could would be better off?

 

[Shemjaza]

Hi there,

So I really want to understand, how this works: take Aphantasia (the inability to visualise), which selection pressures influence whether it is a good or bad thing? Is someone who can't visualize freer to adapt? Or does it force Evolution to reboot - a bad thing? I mean if you believe it once, and then you get aphantasia, you have to re-cognise Evolution again, to get the most out of it?

Does this lead to something other than Evolution, or do the rules of Evolution force adaptation to start again in the exact same way?

I mean it either has a corporate effect, or it doesn't, right? Which one flourishes more?

It probably isn't a major problem in the modern world.

But I guess it would make it harder to be a soldier, professional driver or architect. Thousands of years ago this might have been a problem for a hunter gatherer, but maybe not.

This is all assuming that this is in fact a genetic trait that can be passed onto offspring.

If it isn't genetic, then it has literally nothing to do with evolution.

An individuals ability to visualise the process of evolution is probably completely irrelevant to the evolution of a species.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Evolution is not something that changes depending on a person's viewpoint on things. Evolution is simply the change in genetics through inheritable traits via breeding in response to a changing environment.

Please stop pretending you think you know what you talk about when you clearly don't.

 

[Lawrence87]

Yes, but if someone can visualize Evolution and another cannot, surely you would argue that the one who could would be better off?

I don't really understand, perhaps you can explain it a bit further?

 

[Larniavc]

Hi there,

So I really want to understand, how this works: take Aphantasia (the inability to visualise), which selection pressures influence whether it is a good or bad thing? Is someone who can't visualize freer to adapt? Or does it force Evolution to reboot - a bad thing? I mean if you believe it once, and then you get aphantasia, you have to re-cognise Evolution again, to get the most out of it?

Does this lead to something other than Evolution, or do the rules of Evolution force adaptation to start again in the exact same way?

I mean it either has a corporate effect, or it doesn't, right? Which one flourishes more?

I really can't fathom how you still don't know what evolution and ToE is.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Hi there,

So I really want to understand, how this works: take Aphantasia (the inability to visualise), which selection pressures influence whether it is a good or bad thing? Is someone who can't visualize freer to adapt? Or does it force Evolution to reboot - a bad thing? I mean if you believe it once, and then you get aphantasia, you have to re-cognise Evolution again, to get the most out of it?

Does this lead to something other than Evolution, or do the rules of Evolution force adaptation to start again in the exact same way?

I mean it either has a corporate effect, or it doesn't, right? Which one flourishes more?

The ability to visualize is clearly a complex cognitive phenomenon. Individuals in our species have varying abilities in the area. Given the ubiquity of this skill, those with a severe deficiency stick out and we give this absence a name.

Looking at some online materials, it seems that aphantasia can be caused by minor brain injuries. Aphantasia isn't caused by ones inability to grasp evolution mentally, nor does it seem to be a cause of failure to understand evolution.

Much of the rest of what you wrote is a jumble of misunderstandings that I don't care to untangle.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, but if someone can visualize Evolution and another cannot, surely you would argue that the one who could would be better off?

Yes, since forewarned is forearmed.

He could take precautions against evolving.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yes, since forewarned is forearmed.

He could take precautions against evolving.

But the only way to take a precaution against evolving is to remove the lifeform in question, so you're committing two cardinal sins: murder or suicide.