5 ms·

how about the hubris that we could ever possibly know what the "best" genes are, save whatever is currently desired for our current, extremely limited viewpoint

by icxa 7y ago

how about the hubris that we could ever possibly know what the "best" genes are, save whatever is currently desired for our current, extremely limited viewpoint on what "best" is. It's like reaching a local maxima and thinking you found the peak, but in the grand scheme of an evolutionary timeline were a factor of 100x away from what the real "best" was

Ygg2 7y ago
I heard one fascinating story https://www.nature.com/news/2004/040322/full/news040322-9.html https://www.nature.com/news/2004/040322/full/news040322-9.ht... Apparently human big brains evolved after a mutation that left human jaw much weaker than their ancestors. Who can say if we prune unwanted traits, we aren't also pruning some desired traits as well.
- percentcer 7y ago
  Don't worry, this technology is promising both strong jaws and big brains
  - Ygg2 7y ago
    Apparently those are mutually exclusive :P
ben_w 7y ago
“Best”? No. But evolution isn’t even trying, and only gave us what we have by trial and error. Most of those errors are worse. We’re descended from the mutations which were not worse, but every mutation was random and unplanned (by any reasonable use of the word), all the way back to the primordial soup.
- mirceal 7y ago
  hmm. this view is superlimited. we understand how evolution works and why it happens but the arrogance to believe we could do better is definitely a human trait.
  - ben_w 7y ago
    It may be a human trait, but it really isn’t arrogance. Even without fully understanding the consequences, the fact we have a purpose in mind a massive improvement on evolution.
    - mirceal 7y ago
      not understanding the consequences and/or performing changes at a fast pace without giving either the species or the environment time to adapt is what gets you extinct
      - ben_w 7y ago
        99.9999999999% of species go extinct because evolution didn’t and inherently couldn’t prepare them. Evolution has all the flaws you ascribe to mankind and more besides.
        mirceal 7y ago
        evolution does not prepare you. evolution does nothing. the changes that occur in order to adapt to the environment are what we call evolution. The problem is that the environment does not change (most of the times) suddenly so the fitness function of the individuals can be verified (again most of the times) against the environment for many, many generations. Once you start throwing away validation and you also have a species that has a long lifespan (ie humans) you are throwing away the validation safety net. Sometimes 10 years will pass until you notice something is wrong. Sometimes 50. Even worse, the genes that you are experimenting with will live in the wild and will also get to reproduce/mutate freely. New diseases? Zombies? Superhumans? who knows? My point is that we are not knowledgeable and qualified to play God yet. We will definitely do it and we will invariably fuck it up. That does not mean we should actually attempt to do it.
        ben_w 7y ago
        What you call “validation” ceases to occur after reproduction. My mother and my grandmother on her side both developed Alzheimer’s, which is 100% because evolution hasn’t got a plan and doesn’t care because it’s incapable of planning or caring. My point is that evolution is not qualified to play god, unless by “god” you mean Azathoth.
- DoreenMichele 7y ago
  Evolution is largely a winnowing process. What doesn't die before it can successfully reproduce "wins." This is the explanation behind genetic disorders being more common in certain populations. Sickle Cell Anemia (2 copies of defective gene) is terrible, but Sickle Cell Trait (1 copy) protects against Malaria. Having one copy is advantageous in areas where Malaria is endemic. But I wouldn't go so far as to say evolution isn't even trying. Bacteria apparently produce more mutations than normal in hostile environments, apparently a form of gambling on anything being better than what we are d meoing currently.
  - ben_w 7y ago
    That last paragraph is an interesting perspective, thank you.
bilbo0s 7y ago
Yep. That's the thing with evolution, it's all about the ability to adapt. Caveat being that you never know what adaptation you'll need until the shock arrives, and at that point it's too late. At that point, you either have the ability to adapt, or you don't. Nature doesn't care if you're the smartest, the strongest, the healthiest, the most whatever. Doesn't matter to her. Can you adapt to this different environment or not? That's all that matters. Your average physically fit female would have been dead after less than 15 minutes in the water after Titanic went down. Lower body fat percentage, etc etc etc. At the same time, the portly, out of shape, and perpetually drunk chief baker lived in the water for over 8 hours. Now that's not an example of evolution or anything, but it does illustrate the value of adaptability when shock radical change occurs. The chief baker's body was able to adapt to a radical change in environment, everyone else' was not.

by icxa 7y ago

Ygg2 7y ago

I heard one fascinating story https://www.nature.com/news/2004/040322/full/news040322-9.html https://www.nature.com/news/2004/040322/full/news040322-9.ht... Apparently human big brains evolved after a mutation that left human jaw much weaker than their ancestors. Who can say if we prune unwanted traits, we aren't also pruning some desired traits as well.

percentcer 7y ago
Don't worry, this technology is promising both strong jaws and big brains
- Ygg2 7y ago
  Apparently those are mutually exclusive :P

ben_w 7y ago

“Best”? No. But evolution isn’t even trying, and only gave us what we have by trial and error. Most of those errors are worse. We’re descended from the mutations which were not worse, but every mutation was random and unplanned (by any reasonable use of the word), all the way back to the primordial soup.

mirceal 7y ago
hmm. this view is superlimited. we understand how evolution works and why it happens but the arrogance to believe we could do better is definitely a human trait.
- ben_w 7y ago
  It may be a human trait, but it really isn’t arrogance. Even without fully understanding the consequences, the fact we have a purpose in mind a massive improvement on evolution.
  - mirceal 7y ago
    not understanding the consequences and/or performing changes at a fast pace without giving either the species or the environment time to adapt is what gets you extinct
    - ben_w 7y ago
      99.9999999999% of species go extinct because evolution didn’t and inherently couldn’t prepare them. Evolution has all the flaws you ascribe to mankind and more besides.
      - mirceal 7y ago
        evolution does not prepare you. evolution does nothing. the changes that occur in order to adapt to the environment are what we call evolution. The problem is that the environment does not change (most of the times) suddenly so the fitness function of the individuals can be verified (again most of the times) against the environment for many, many generations. Once you start throwing away validation and you also have a species that has a long lifespan (ie humans) you are throwing away the validation safety net. Sometimes 10 years will pass until you notice something is wrong. Sometimes 50. Even worse, the genes that you are experimenting with will live in the wild and will also get to reproduce/mutate freely. New diseases? Zombies? Superhumans? who knows? My point is that we are not knowledgeable and qualified to play God yet. We will definitely do it and we will invariably fuck it up. That does not mean we should actually attempt to do it.
        ben_w 7y ago
        What you call “validation” ceases to occur after reproduction. My mother and my grandmother on her side both developed Alzheimer’s, which is 100% because evolution hasn’t got a plan and doesn’t care because it’s incapable of planning or caring. My point is that evolution is not qualified to play god, unless by “god” you mean Azathoth.
DoreenMichele 7y ago
Evolution is largely a winnowing process. What doesn't die before it can successfully reproduce "wins." This is the explanation behind genetic disorders being more common in certain populations. Sickle Cell Anemia (2 copies of defective gene) is terrible, but Sickle Cell Trait (1 copy) protects against Malaria. Having one copy is advantageous in areas where Malaria is endemic. But I wouldn't go so far as to say evolution isn't even trying. Bacteria apparently produce more mutations than normal in hostile environments, apparently a form of gambling on anything being better than what we are d meoing currently.
- ben_w 7y ago
  That last paragraph is an interesting perspective, thank you.

bilbo0s 7y ago

Yep. That's the thing with evolution, it's all about the ability to adapt. Caveat being that you never know what adaptation you'll need until the shock arrives, and at that point it's too late. At that point, you either have the ability to adapt, or you don't. Nature doesn't care if you're the smartest, the strongest, the healthiest, the most whatever. Doesn't matter to her. Can you adapt to this different environment or not? That's all that matters. Your average physically fit female would have been dead after less than 15 minutes in the water after Titanic went down. Lower body fat percentage, etc etc etc. At the same time, the portly, out of shape, and perpetually drunk chief baker lived in the water for over 8 hours. Now that's not an example of evolution or anything, but it does illustrate the value of adaptability when shock radical change occurs. The chief baker's body was able to adapt to a radical change in environment, everyone else' was not.