Re: Emergent Networks and Fine Art
So, to summarize, the problem is that natural selection is ultimately nothing more than a circular explanation that, as Dawkins has acknowledged, many believe is true but that can’t really be proved. It doesn’t really predict any more than common sense and maybe a bit of imagination would predict—the individuals/traits having higher survival and reproduction rates are going to, you guessed it, survive and reproduce at higher rates—how could it be otherwise? What is needed is a theory for the phenomena of biological evolution that is as coherent and convincing as our present theories of the inanimate world.
|