Natural Selection - The Process

Natural selection

The process

     After a few billion years of natural selection some generalizations regarding the process can be made. When exposed, these generalizations seem obvious because they are observable extensions of other familiar natural processes which also guide nature’s many experiments.

• Natural selection requires continual deviations from pure strains
• Natural selection filters toward complexity   
• Natural selection filters toward accelerated selections
• Natural selection can be focused or expanded by environmental changes.
• Natural selection filters toward advances in awareness

     The selection of a new characteristic requires at least two different attributes from which to choose and a standard of measure against which they can be tested. Neither of these conditions are purposeful arrangements. Physical environments are random arrangements endlessly diverse and ever changing. Add to this physical complexity, the living half of an environment, including predators, parasites, essential foods etc. and the complexity of the total environment against which our two choices are to be tested becomes extreme. Tested against such complexity the odds are that if only two options are offered, both options will fail. Increase the number of attributes to be tested, from two to a very large number with extreme diversity, and the odds of a successful selection are greatly improved. Natural Selection functions effectively only when the diversity of the natural environment is challenged by an equally diverse array of living attributes from which to choose. A single strain in a static environment will never change, and a pure unchanging strain challenged by a changing environment will not survive.

     The simplest pieces of reproductive matter gave birth to the simplest of living cells. Anaerobic bacteria thrived for several billion years in earth’s early hostile acidic, hot, methane environment as life’s first and only kingdom. As the earth cooled, cyanobacteria, blue-green bacteria, emerged and transformed the earth’s atmosphere from 1% oxygen to 20% oxygen through a process known as, oxygen eliminating (excreting), photosynthesis. The chemical transformation of a planet’s entire atmosphere by a microscopic life form is not only amazing in its scope but also in its results. Without this atmospheric transformation there would be no ozone layer, no life on land, and the other four living kingdoms could not have evolved. This first kingdom of early single celled life is recorded in sedimentary rocks and as fossilized stromatolites. Blue-green bacteria are alive today and, along with a few surviving anaerobic bacteria, are life’s longest persisting living form.

     Kingdom 1, Prokaryotes, (bacteria), still live around us, on us and in us, in extreme numbers. There are over 10,000,000,000 in every spoonful of garden soil and they comprise a significant portion of the dry weight of all animals. Over 10,000 species of bacteria have been identified and there are many more. Bacteria continue to play a significant role in Earth’s biosphere, including the chemical composition of the atmosphere. They also provide essential symbiotic survival relationships for most plants and animals, including man, and are both the cause of, and the basis for cures for, many diseases and are themselves subject to viral infections. All bacteria belong to the kingdom prokaryotae, (monera). Early bacteria lacked a well formed cell nucleus and reproduce asexually by simple cell division, (mitosis). Bacteria were the only life form for more than half of the history of the Earth and begin to leave a fossil record 3.4 billion years ago. With extreme numbers of bacteria being tested in an ever changing physical environment over such a long period of time, one might expect a proliferation of other types of living forms, but natural selection continued to test only bacteria for two million years, produced hundreds of identifiable species but did not jump to more advanced forms of life until cyanobacteria began transforming the atmosphere 2 billion years ago. With the advent of a new oxygen rich atmosphere, natural selection took advantage of the new environment and cells with a nucleus quickly evolved. From these eukaryotic cells, multi cellular life emerged and the process of natural selection accelerated.

     (Kingdom 2), Protoctistae; the first multi cellular forms, (protozoa, aquatic kelp, slime molds and molds), began their line of natural selection about 1.2 billion years ago and persists today with 27 phyla and thousands of species.         

From kingdom 2 the other kingdoms developed; (Kingdom3); Fungi   ( Kingdom 4); Animals,  and (Kingdom 5); Plants. Each began their separate lines with the earliest evidence for aquatic animals appearing about 700 million years ago and the earliest land plants and fungi appearing about 470 million years ago.

     Today nearly all animals are aquatic and worm like with only two of the 33 primary phyla truly adapted to living on the land, (chordates and arthropods). Thousands of species of animals exist today in these two phyla and tens of thousands of species have arisen in all of the animal phyla with most now extinct. Plants have fewer phyla with only 10 but have tens of thousands of species. Fungi have been divided into only 5 phyla but also have thousands of different species. The large numbers of species in the five kingdoms attests to a natural divergence from pure genetic strains and the augmentation of diversity by the natural selection of variant forms. The increased complexity of later species attests to a natural trend toward complex forms including increases in awareness.    

     The selection of the ever increasing complexities associated with cilia, flagella, fins, legs and wings attests to natural selection’s tendency to select the more complex. Likewise, selections of complex manipulative apparatus, such as mandibles, beaks, tentacles and hands help to insure a life form’s future through the use of natural tools. The interactions of predator and pray have led to the natural selection of complex weapons like fangs, claws, and poisons and complex defenses like body armor, improved sensory warning systems, and natural antidotes. Complex sensory and neurological systems have also been naturally selected as small incremental increases in awareness provided a slight edge for survival in changing environments and in competitions with other evolving forms. Natural Selection appears to have rejected the path of “keep it simple and stupid” in favor of a path to, “the complex and smart”.

     For the first two thirds of life’s four billion year history, life evolved at a very slow pace. The natural selection process was in low gear because the environment was somewhat static. Only the oceans supported life and proto genetic forms had produced only single celled creatures. Natural selection also remained slow because there were few new attributes to be tested and environmental tests varied only slightly. There are several theories as to what shifted natural selection into second gear. One; that the prodigious success of anaerobic single cells multiplying at an arithmetic rate breathed up most of the methane and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and exhaled so much oxygen that they poisoned themselves, created a new atmosphere and opened the door to a new type of cell that used oxygen and exhaled carbon dioxide. Another theory is; that the entire Earth became frozen, that the ice absorbed most of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and when it thawed, millions of years later, because of volcanic activity, the carbon dioxide was retained by being absorbed in the melt water. With the ice and most of the carbon dioxide gone the earth presented a new and more complex environment that spawned new and faster developing life forms.

     Whatever the actuality we can verify the acceleration of natural selection by examining fossil records. Natural selection was slow when mitosis (simple cell division) was the only reproductive method and the biosphere was relatively stable. The advent of gene sharing introduced sex and death simultaneously and increased the number of variant genetic combinations exponentially. Instead of waiting for an anomaly to occur in the static genetic arrangements of single cells, gene sharing produced new genetic arrangements with every swap. Natural selection requires large numbers of potential selectees to find adaptations that improve survivability and pass on modified codes. Codes carried forward by variant forms carry within them the tendency for even more variant forms and thus accelerate their production. In this convoluted way, gene sharing, (sex), caused an explosion of variant forms to run through the natural selection process. New forms soon found suitable niches in nature’s environmental offerings and continued their own genetic combinational experiments to create an even greater pool of variants. The proliferation of new forms also added to the complexity of the biophysical testing ground and opened many new corners into which new variants could benefit from even small advantages. New forms generating new forms are selected more frequently because the environment becomes more diversified as they are added. The result of all of these new combinational possibilities was, and continues to be, a constant push on natural selection’s accelerator.

     Natural selection favors genomes with tens of thousands of genes and millions of alleles because they are prodigious variant producers. The preference by natural selection for large numbers of alleles in genetic structures, (the unit of transfer for physical characteristics), also applies to the selection of advanced aware states through an increase in meme choices, (the unit of transfer for acquired responses). The pace of natural selection accelerates with success, and this tendency has contributed to both the accelerated development of awareness and physical forms.

Natural Selection, The Concept

Natural Selection

The concept

     The concept of “Natural Selection” is extraordinarily simple, almost an oxymoron, “what works continues and what doesn’t work disappears”.  The concept of natural selection can also be applied to the study of inert physical formations and elements but the method only becomes significant when it is applied to the development of living matter.

     Darwin’s introduction to “The Origin of Species” makes it clear that his observations taught him, not how things evolve, (he disliked the term  evolution  and preferred  transmutation ), but that variations in living forms were naturally selected by being tested for their compatibility with their environment.

      “…..I am convinced that Natural Selection has been the most important, but not the exclusive, means of modification,”

     Darwin understood the process that nature uses to weed out and promote living forms according to their compatibility with their environment and he was aware that living forms were constantly changing by modifying and abandoning various characteristics. What Darwin could not explain was how these new attributes came about. For natural selection to work the reproductive process has to occasionally produce a new or altered characteristic. This continual process of modification was observable and accepted but was difficult to explain. The controversies that surrounded the term “Evolution” were primarily the result of a lack of information regarding the modification process, not nature’s actual selection process, and the controversies continued for many years until the gene was identified. Until it was realized that living characteristics were transferred in discrete units, arguments for various causes continued. Some argued that these variations were the direct result of a purposeful push by the environment. Others argued that the variations were caused by increased or decreased use of an appendage or organ, and others argued that they were unexplainable random occurrences?       

    Darwin’s choice of words to explain nature’s process of sorting through life’s emerging attributes also created controversy because he chose the word “Selection”, which carries within it the hint of a purposeful decision. This was not Darwin’s intent. He fully understood that the process is mechanical not purposeful. Darwin’s insight into nature’s selection method might have generated less controversy had he chosen, “Natural Elimination”, (the attributes favorable to a life forms continuance are incorporated in future generations because they are “left over” after attributes that are detrimental or insignificant are eliminated). However, if Darwin had chosen to describe the process by which nature measures new life against the environment as; “Transmutation through Natural Elimination”, his name would probably not have earned a place in history.

     With the discovery of the gene, and its inner workings, we now understand how living forms are randomly modified without purpose or intent, and how these random modifications are then sifted by natural selection to add their survival value to future generations. Both steps in the process, random modifications and selection by elimination, are required for life’s continued adaptations. Natural selection is a very simple process, a very efficient adaptive method, and a powerful force. The principles of Natural Selection can be used to explain more than just life’s physical attributes. Natural Selection has played a role in the advent and development of sensory organs, neurological centers for interpretation and response, long and short term memory, like kind recognition, language and more. Natural selection has been at work selecting more than just physical forms. Natural selection has also been the impetus for the advent and advancement of awareness.

     Applying the concept of natural selection to the evolution of awareness makes awareness understandable. New attributes of awareness are tested to see if they will work in a current environment just as physical attributes are tested. If they work they are transferred to future generations by genes, by example, or through language. If they don’t work they are naturally “deselected”. Natural selection explains the physical diversity and history of life. It also explains the development and diversity of awareness. Natural selection is not only Nature’s guiding hand it is also Nature’s alarm clock, and has been busy awakening the stardust forming all living forms..

 

The Search For and Descovery of The Gene

The Search For and Discovery of the Gene

     The recognition that inherited characteristics flow through generations of both plants and animals existed even in ancient times. A six thousand year old Babylonian tablet lists pedigrees of horses and possible inherited characteristics. Hippocrates, (460-375 BCE), postulated that each organ of the body grew from seeds that were passed from the father to the mother where they were reassembled. Aristotle (384-322 BCE), speculated that inherited characteristics were the result of purified blood shared during coitus, (we still talk of being related by blood). Man has been aware that some mechanism was behind the transfer of inherited characteristics long before he became civilized but had to wait for the advent of the scientific method of inquiry to uncover the chemistry involved. 

     The mechanisms of heredity began to be deciphered in the middle of the 19^th century when Gregor Mendel proposed that inherited characteristics were carried forward to the next generation in discrete units. Mendel used a strict methodology. He observed and recorded results. He then hypothesized and followed up with further experimentation and observation. His methods remain as the basis of genetic studies to this day.

     The evolution of living forms from disassociated groupings of single celled entities to multi-cellular forms is documented in nature’s hard cover books, (sedimentary rocks), and explained further in its soft cover books, (DNA). The examination of these records has given us an understanding of the developmental paths life has taken, and the ability to read the twisted threads that make up nature’s language of life. Nature describes life one individual at a time and in a series of sequential steps using only a four letter alphabet and simple grammatical rules. By allowing an occasional grammatical error and by demanding that variants comply with changing conditions, life persists. We call this thread language genetic information and each single fully formed description a Genome, each set of threaded sentences a Chromosome, and the discrete units described by Mendel, (sentences within chromosomes), we have named; Genes.

     The gene is the piece of the puzzle that Darwin lacked to fully explain the evolution of life by natural selection. Now we can see the gene, manipulate it, read its information, compare descriptions for various life forms and trace the history of living forms recorded in its descriptive codes. The gene is now out of the box along with a host of new questions that its appearance has prompted.

     As the concept of evolution coalesced, physical evidence for the idea was being accumulated. In 1869 a Swiss chemist, Johann Miescher, extracted a substance containing nitrogen and phosphorus from individual cell nuclei. We now know that what he extracted was the phosphate molecules that, along with sugar molecules, form the backbone of genetic strands and the nitrogen containing molecules that form part of the nucleotides of DNA. These nucleotides were later determined, in both plants and animals, to consist of four basic types; adenine (A), guanine (G), thymine (T), and cytosine (C). Further examination determined that each species has different proportions of these nucleic acids and in the early 1950s, Austrian born biochemist Erwin Chargraff found that although proportions varied, the amount of (A) was always equal to the amount of (T) and the amount of (G) is always equal to the amount of (C).

      At about the same time, using X-ray diffraction methods, British physicists Rosalind Franklin and Maurice Wilkins showed that DNA casts a shadow resembling a string of overlapping (Xs). This shape and the relationship of (A) to (T) and (G) to (C) suggested to American geneticist James Watson and British biophysicist Francis Crick that DNA had the shape of a twisted ladder (double helix) and in 1953 they constructed a large wire model of the suggested molecule and it became clear that couplings of (A-T) (T-A) and (G-C) (C-G) were rungs on the ladder. Crick and Watson also noted that their model fulfilled the features of a hereditary molecule in that the rungs, A-T, G-C etc. could be cut, leaving a single genetic letter attached to each side of the dissected ladder and new sides could be replicated to replace the missing sides by growing the appropriate paired letter to create two identical ladders. To confirm these findings and conclusions American geneticists Matthew Meselson and Franklin Stahl grew bacterial cells in the presence of heavy atoms of nitrogen so that both sides of their experimental hereditary ladders used only heavy nitrogen in the formation of the bacteria’s nucleotides. They then placed the bacteria in a medium of normal nitrogen and as the bacteria reproduced they used the normal nitrogen to form the missing sides of each ladder. As expected, the new bacteria contained equal amounts of heavy and normal hydrogen supporting the hypothesized replication process.

     Attempts to answer questions related to heredity have been ongoing since ancient times. Aristotle foreshadowed evolutionary thought when he wrote;

    “…and in like manner as to other body parts in which there appears to exist an adaptation to an end and all the parts of one whole happened as if they were made for the sake of something and have been preserved by having been appropriately constituted by an internal spontaneity and further that things not thus constituted have perished and will continue to perish.”

      Philosophy, science and religion have all contributed to the development of genetic theory and continuing investigations have expanded into numerous sub areas of practical application and further research. Classical genetics now includes; microbial genetics, population genetics, cytogenetics, molecular genetics, genomics, human genetics, behavior genetics, epigenetics, and applied genetics in medicine, agriculture and industry.

     Genetics is now out of the box and cannot be put back without dismantling civilization itself.

We now know that every living form contains its own unique coded description, that the language is the same for bacteria, plants and animals, and that all life has a common heritage and that life’s code is passed from generation to generation ready to be translated by RNA into proteins that make up all multi-cellular structures.

     From atoms comes the chemistry of life, from the chemistry of life comes the coded word, from the coded word comes living form, and from the living form, Awareness.  

Evolutionary Theory, The Concept

Evolution, the Concept

     Natural selection is the filter used by nature to guide living organisms to a successful fit with their environment. Darwin called evolution ‘natural’ because it appears to be undirected and takes place without intervention. A river flowing downhill is called a natural occurrence, and life adapting to its environment is just as natural. We are more comfortable with the natural process of water flowing downhill, than with the natural selection of living forms, because water flowing downhill is an easy observation and fits neatly into our pace of awareness.. The downhill water concept takes only a second to observe, involves only a simple subject and requires very little conceptualization. The evolution of living forms, on the other hand, takes place at a pace well below our observational rate, involves an extremely complex set of observational subjects, and requires considerable conceptualization.

     Religious explanations for the creation of various species often conflict with scientific findings. Paradoxically, genetics, as a scientific discipline, began in an Augustinian monastery where a monk; Gregor Mendel, used careful observation and a statistical analysis of pea plants to provided evidence that hereditary characteristics are passed from generation to generation as particulate factors. His paper, published in 1866, (seven years after Darwin published his “Origin of Species”), was a masterly use of scientific method. Both Mendel’s work and Darwin’s ideas, however, remained unappreciated for years. Mendel’s work remained an unread paper for 31 years. During the same time period, Darwin’s conclusions were embroiled in a lengthy confrontation with alternate explanations based upon the idea that organs and other living characteristics evolved, or were discarded, based upon their use or disuse. These ideas remained a viable alternative until Mendel’s papers were rediscovered in 1900. The rediscovery of Mendel’s work revitalized the idea that heredity could be passed by discrete units and that it could be the basis for evolutionary changes. Mendel’s observations and conclusions gave new support to Darwin’s point of view.  The controversy between mutationists, (Mendalians), and biometricians, (Lemarkians), approached resolution in the 1920s when mathematical arguments showed that variations in living characteristics could be explained by Mendel’s laws, and that small variations could become cumulative effects and result in major evolutionary changes as suggested by Darwin.

     The fact that Darwinian ideas became dominant because of scientific observations made by a religious monk, should help those who see science as the enemy of religion understand that science is simply a careful examination of our surroundings followed by experimentation to check the validity of any conclusions reached. When nature tells us something different than our religious teachings we either have to choose between opposing views or seek a compromise. The theory of evolution is the result of many compromises, some by science as new evidence required old theories to be modified, and some by religious thinkers as simple explanations became inadequate. St. Augustine allowed that some life forms must have developed after the great biblical flood since Noah’s ark could not have been large enough to hold all observable contemporary forms. Theologians of the middle ages, like St. Thomas Aquinas, also accepted the possibility that living things could be generated from inanimate matter and that such a possibility was not incompatible with religious teaching.

Evolutionary Theory, Early Observations

     Early man observed and understood the basics of animal breeding while he was still subsisting as a hunter gatherer. The observable fact that there is a slow succession of changes in physical characteristics from generation to generation, in both plants and animals, has never been questioned. This slow evolution of characteristics is obvious and is universally accepted. Also accepted is the fact that the slow process of generational change is sometimes interrupted by the advent of an individual with physical or behavioral characteristics very different from their ancestral stream. These anomalies have been noted for eons and, until recently, interpreted as super-natural occurrences or interventions by an unseen god.

     The idea of evolution is much older than Darwin, but the concept remained buried because there was no observable mechanism to explain how nature could practice selective breeding using random methods, or how a small errant modification could lead to a completely new variety or species. A purposeful creation by the gods with a unique pre-existing design for each creature was the accepted explanation throughout much of man’s history and is still accepted by many.

     Evolutionary theory lay dormant for many centuries but continued to tease the observant by prompting the same inevitable questions. With the discovery and exploration of the New World, hundreds of new life forms were observed. New plants, new insects, new birds, new fish and new animals were all discovered. As sketches and samples of these amazing plants and animals arrived in the Old World, questions as to their origins were inevitable, and the pursuit of an overall explanation for the diversity of living forms was revived. Functional forms seemed to fit their environment perfectly, why? Were long necks or strong jaws developed out of need and these traits somehow passed on to later generations? How could stretching one’s neck transform the necks of the next generation?  Charles Darwin’s grandfather, Erasmus, struggled with these age old questions long before Charles took up the quest. On the surface it seemed obvious. If an animal needed a long neck to reach food it grew one and then passed the long neck quality on to its offspring, but how?

     Man discovered early that containing and controlling selected animals was much more efficient than following their migrations. Animal domestication predates civilization, and man learned quickly that he could change the characteristics of an entire heard by selective breeding, and could not help but wonder if similar changes in wild animals might be due to selective breeding by some unseen hand. Early man was close to asking the right questions, but far from being able to answer them. It took Charles Darwin’s observations of birds, plants and animals, from various islands in the Galapagos, to refine the questions and create a relevant answer, not a final answer, but one that put us on the right path.

     Darwin noted that identical species on different islands often exhibited slightly different characteristics in size and color. If there was no apparent difference in their environments, where did the differences come from? The obvious answer was that the changes were random and the results became preferred for insignificant reasons. What Darwin was observing and recording, but not explaining, was the occurrence of genetic drift. Equally important, were his observations of adaptive changes in a species when slightly different environments were presented. Separated groups originating from identical stock could apparently have their physical characteristics selected to fit a changing environment when nature practiced its own version of selective breeding. The difference between nature’s selective process and man’s selective process is that man can reach his selective breeding goals in a few dozen generations, while nature usually takes hundreds or thousands of generations and, unlike man, has no final goal in mind, and depends upon genetic errors to offer up divergent characteristics.  

    Natural selection requires a very large number of individuals and extremely long time periods to affect changes. The process is completely random and has no stopping point. A very slight modification in form or function that gives a slight advantage in breeding or survival will carry forward as a small statistical preference that can, occasionally, become a strongly preferred trait. A new trait or form arriving spontaneously as a genetic mutation faces the same test. The new anomaly must add a small statistical mating or survival advantage immediately, and then remain an advantage over the long term. These advantageous traits, arriving either from the slow drift of individual characteristics, or an occasional spontaneous modification, are both subject to cancellation or enhancement if the environment that supports them changes. The process of natural adaptation is slow. Environmental changes however, can be swift by comparison. A trait that has a strong survival advantage can be cancelled in just a few generations by an environmental change or the introduction of a new predator. Survival and mating advantages are also a complex mix of causes and conditions. They are never a one at a time test and a mix of preferred and detrimental characteristics can carry poor performance traits forward through many generations. The process is random, uncertain, has no apparent goal and has created an amazing array of divergent life forms ranging from bacteria to mammals, and the process of genetic drift and environmental testing continues without any apparent stopping point.

     We are so accustomed to our own creative methods that we have difficulty imagining any other. For most of our history we insisted on the preposterous notion that nature, or the creator, had to do things like humans and within time spans we could comprehend. For us a pocket watch is always evidence for a watch maker. We assume that when the watch is complete it will stop being modified, and that a design and a purpose for the watch necessarily preceded its creation.  Fortunately nature doesn’t do things like humans. In nature basic laws govern firmly but allow extreme latitude. No advanced design is needed to create a planet a mountain or a living thing. Creative events can occur very quickly, too fast for a human to notice, or very slowly, too slow for a human to comprehend, and the creative process is ongoing, nothing is ever completed, and as a result, life persists.

     The creator, if one exists, appears to be playing an unending game of dice, continually casting the die into every environment and whenever doubles come up, lets them reproduce until a change in the environment cancels the play. From this perspective life has no special significance and no purpose beyond the game itself. There is however, another perspective that may give the observable creative process significance. Continual play and adaptive changes both testify to a natural tendency to fit life into every possible environment and to adjust living forms as needed to maintain a living presence as the environment changes. Life seems so important that it is tested against every possibility, adjusted as needed to persist, incorporates increases in complexity as a survival advantage, is randomly introduced and transforms itself to fit into every possible physical domain. To insure life’s continuation it never stops adapting. Explaining this persistence may be beyond our capabilities, but denying it is equally difficult. The development and continuance of life appears to be as much a part of the universe as the laws of physics. The hierarchy of physical creations seems echoed in the hierarchy of living creations. From atoms to organic molecules to nucleic acids to cells to multi cellular forms, life is ordered in a hierarchy that is obvious but difficult to explain.

      The universe seeks entropy by smoothing all of its parts into a uniform energy mix. It is opposed in this natural tendency by the creative force of gravity as it gathers basic elements into the nuclear furnaces we call stars, and by the persistence of life as it gathers organic molecules into complex energy forms. This opposition to entropy creates sequences of ordered events that we could interpret as creative intent, but we have no evidence to support such a conclusion. We can only observe and continue to ask; does life have any purpose beyond being a persistent part of a universal mechanical mix? Our self awareness makes our questions inevitable. Why am I here? What am I supposed to be doing? What happens when my awareness ends? Aware of our own existence we have no choice but to answer that our existence must have a purpose and that we are important in the scheme of things, otherwise there is no point to the inquiry. To assure ourselves that we have significance we have been very inventive. Creation theories, myths, religions and scientific inquiry, all testify to our need to find answers to these universal questions

     Nature’s book is open for us to read, but the conclusions we draw will always be self aggrandizing. Getting beyond our own limited self awareness will always be difficult. We seem doomed to read nature’s book with our own reflections constantly blurring the pages. We are very small creatures in a very large universe and are forced to observe our surroundings at our own living pace, within our own limited scope of awareness, and restricted by our conceptual limitations.

The Awakening of Matter

The Other Half of Evolution

LEVELS OF AWARENESS

From Microbes to Man

A Common Thread in Life’s Great Diversity

By Vern A Westfall

Foreword

     There is a common thread running through life’s diversity that has been overshadowed by our focus on physical forms.

   …. “I am convinced”, Darwin wrote, “that Natural Selection has been the most important, but not the exclusive means of modification……”

      Darwin’s understanding of how living forms are modified has been our primary guide to understanding life’s changing physical characteristics, but natural selection has another trace. Following Darwin’s hesitant lead in attempting to understand emotions and instincts;

……I am convinced that Natural Selection has also been the most important, but not the exclusive means of creating a common chain of developing awareness that unites all living things.

      We are made of the dust from exploding stars and are the product of three and one half billion years of adaptations to earth’s changing environments. Life’s serendipitous beginnings may have occurred in comet’s tails or in tidal pools and we may never know the complete story, but we can follow life’s tangled web from its conception to the present by following two parallel paths, two things all living things have in common; genes and awareness.

     Our genetic trace is splintered and has millions of discarded attempts and millions of successful living forms. The trace of emerging awareness is less fractured, has fewer discards and is easier to follow, but is more difficult to analyze. Form and awareness are inexorably linked and have always been tested by natural selection as a complimentary pair. Physical form and awareness have been full partners in the development of life from the beginning and we can expect to find the same essential pairing in every living thing we may yet discover; be it in the ocean’s depths or on other planets. Awareness is more than mind, more than intelligence, more than consciousness, more than reason, and more than cognizance because it is all of them. Awareness is an essential component of the evolutionary process, is common to all life and recently has usurped genetic selection as the primary determinant of life’s future. To understand the evolution of life fully we must recognize awareness as equal in importance to the gene and consider it an emergent state with significance beyond the organs that produce it.

Next Blog:  Evolutionary Theory