Adaptationism

Y

yayacatfight

Registered Senior Member
Hi everyone,

I'm reading Dennett's, Darwin's Dangerous Idea and on page 276 he states, "The thesis that every property of every feature of everything in the living world is an adaptation is not a thesis anyone has ever taken seriously...."

My question is can someone name a property of a feature of anything in the living world that is not? I can't think of one.

Thanks!
 
The burden is to prove a "feature" is a direct adaptation to a selection pressure, not to just presume it is. Some "features" are only present because of physical or genetic constraints, see link for examples.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptationism

I wonder really how much debate there is. I haven’t read Dennetts book yet, but it seems clear by the quote in the OP that know one is taking extreme sides on this. It is "just" a matter on agreeing what constitutes adequate proof of adaptation.
 
Qwerty phenomena in general are difficult to describe reasonably as "adaptations". Also, the absence of a likely feature of value would seem to be non-adaptive.

The blind spot in the mammalian eye, say, or the absence of a lens in the nautilus eye.

The location of the big toe - the main walking and running leverage toe of the human foot - on the inside rather than in the middle, or the absence of vitamin C synthesis capability in humans (and guinea pigs and nothing else AFAIK).
 
I read recently that the Pygmies of Africa aren't short because it's an adaptation, rather some genes that confer disease resistance happen to be associated with the ones that control height.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top