🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <kj3erwzqj4.fsf@lnsil2.lns.cornell.edu>, Jon Thaler <jjt@mail.lns.cornell.edu> writes:
|> Geoff Sheffield <geoff@m_l.com> writes:
|> 
|> (...stuff deleted...)
|> 
|> > Natural selection says that features which
|> > improve chances for survival (and reproductive success) are 
|> > preferred.
|> 
|> Isn't this a tautology?  We only know which features improve chances
|> for survival by observing which are preferred.

    First of all, science does use tautologies.  People have pointed 
out that an equation such as F=ma, where the concepts of force and 
mass are virtually defined by the equation, might be considered a 
tautology.

    But not all features which improve chances for survival are
inherited.  So it's a little more complicated than just being a
tautology.

|> 
|> Does the concept of natural selection have predictive power, or is it
|> only good for retrodiction?  Please give examples.

    I suggest that you look at the book "The Beak of the Finch", by
Jonathan Weiner.  As it won a Pulitzer Prize a couple of years ago,
it is very likely in your local public library.

-- 
Tom Scharle         scharle.1@nd.edu       "standard disclaimer"