Ok, first of all, let's all agree that evolution is a fact. If you don't agree with that, then this probably isn't the thread for you.

I am interested in how humans are evolving currently.

Macroscopic evolutionary changes happen on a scale of, say 10,000 years. (Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong:) ) But our lives change on a scale of maybe centuries---that is, our lives are drastically different than they were 500 or 1000 years ago. And we can only imagine how our lives will be different 500 or 1000 years in the future. This, coupled with the increasing mobility of the world's population, seem to mean that the small changes that drive evolution cannot be correlated with environment anymore.

I have thought in the past about this question, and have always ended up at dead ends. Are we in control of how we evolve? Or does evolution still happen in the normal way?

Automated but not at all self-regulating, I would think. Drastic changes? Physical? Who cares about physical changes; we need drastic changes of consciousness. And that might not be what you're interested in, right?

Drastic changes? Physical? Who cares about physical changes; we need drastic changes of consciousness.

I mean, what will "humans" become? In the Kurt-Vonnegut(RIP)-we-get-stuck-on-an-isolated-island-and-turn-into-fish sense.

And that might not be what you're interested in, right?

Right:)

The thread titled appealed to me for absolutely one reason: are we in control of evolution emplies that we can control evolution, and by that, I immediately answered or thought, yes, of course we can.

Or maybe "are" we in control of evolution? I don't know! That is an interesting question!

We must be in control of evolution somehow...

But how would 'we' be in contrjol of evolution in the first place?

I hope that is given some thoughts to you.

ummmm not really.

We have certainly influenced evolution in species other than humans. Take a drive in the country. We drastically accelerated the evolution of all of the domesticated plants and animals you will see during that drive.

We accomplished this by long-term selective breeding. There have been some inadvertent long-term selective breeding experiments performed on humans as well: the rich and famous almost exclusively marry the rich and famous. A side-effect of these "experiments" is the hemophilia in European royalty.

You know what accelerates evolution? Breeding more individuals accelerates evolution. That's more throws of the genetic dice whether you're talking about recombination or environmental influences on the genetic code.

First produce variety, then cull differentially.

Repeat steps one and two. After a while, the being has evolved.

We have been, for a few hundred years, amazingly riding step one. It's been a large vertebrate population boom possibly unprecedented on the planet.

After the next step two event, we will discover whatever direction evolution has taken in us. Possibly,for example, the next culling will differentially reduce the prevalence of the genes for CD4 T cell receptors. Or perhaps delayed menarche will be favored. Or simply having the right number of children fro the best statistical odds. Being shorter than five foot three. Never eating wheat gluten, for allergy reasons. Tolerating heavy metal pollution and radiation well.

There is absolutely no way to tell how we are evolving. Much less control it.

There is absolutely no way to tell how we are evolving. Much less control it.

I guess the thesis was poorly worded. The point I was making is that our environments are changing on a scale much shorter than the scale customarily associated with the evolutionary time scale.

It could very well be that I have a poor concept of "evolution" in general.

Somebody may "punctuated equilibriumate" any day now.

I don't think we'll see much physical evolution in ourselves anymore. We're already on the verge of controlling our genes and with modern medicine natural selection doesn't play the same role that it used to in our species. Any mutation gets labelled a disease or disorder and people immediately set to work in finding a 'cure', we're long past the time when physical characteristics determine how successful you are in surviving to pass on your genes. With the advances in medicine these days I can imagine us having full control over our genes and physical evolution in a couple hundred years or so.

But I think we'll still evolve even then, not physically but psychologically. I see this time as the equivalent of the Cambrian explosion in the evolution of memes. I'm not sure if we're controlling it or if it's in some way controlling our evolution. With every major technological advancement we change the evolution of memes, but at the same time their evolution affects aspects of our culture and psychology.

To sum it all up, I think we're past the point where the evolutionary success of an individual depends on physical traits and we're rapidly moving into an environment where psychological evolution is the new form of natural selection.

Isn't it interesting that the earliest civilizations were relativey advanced, such as the Egyptians, the Olmecs, the Stonehenge Brits, and the Sumerians, with ebbs and flows of knowledge and technology through the millenia thereafter, until modern times.

To sum it all up, I think we're past the point where the evolutionary success of an individual depends on physical traits and we're rapidly moving into an environment where psychological evolution is the new form of natural selection.

I would agree with you, if people with a certain psychological characteristic were more successful passing on their genes. But this seems not to be true.

I would agree with you, if people with a certain psychological characteristic were more successful passing on their genes. But this seems not to be true.
Well that's the thing, anyone can pass on their genes these days. In fact it's been that way for several hundred years at least. The drive to pass on genes is something I'd lump into the 'physical evolution' catagory. It's also why I would maintain that we won't evolve much physically anymore, except maybe in the blending between races.

Now it's more about who's successful culturally. Who's liked by people, who's successful financially, who plans for their family's future, how people raise their children etc. Our evolution and the evolution of the memes we create seem to be converging.

Every decade the barrier between us and the technological world we create gets smaller, it's hard to imagine that we won't close the gap completely in a couple hundred years time. Given the advances in nanotechnology how far could we be from duplicating the robustness of biological cells with microscopic machines? The ground work for mechanical "life" has already been laid, I believe it's just a matter of time before it becomes a reality.

Those are just some musings about the future though, who knows what will happen.

The point I was making is that our environments are changing on a scale much shorter than the scale customarily associated with the evolutionary time scale. If the point is that human society and cultural circumstance is the main context of gene selection now, and non-human selection pressure no longer dominate, I would agree. But we are not in control of these factors. We cannot even say, for example, what the ideal number of children would be for future evolutionary success among our own culture-mates. We cannot say which of our cultural practices reduce or augment our future probabilities of evolutionary "success".

And of course as human beings we are under no obligation, or even suggestion, to take evolutionary success as a goal or evaluation criterion of any kind. We have other fish to fry, and the asteroid with our number on it won't care anyway. If our genes have built disobedient robots, and screwed themsleves thererby, so what?

We are in control of nothing; we are part of the reason why anything happens, though. Evolution is controlled by interaction between organism and environment. Environment can be changed by organism and vice versa. Evolution also occurs in environment.