There two distinct theses about our existence. The first is the creationist one which suggest that we were created by god. The second is evolutionist and suugests that we as well as other living organisms are the outcome of accidental events. whether we beleive in the former or latter theses, there certainly is a perspective for our evolution. What, in your expert opinion, are our perspectives for evolution, and how are we llikely to evolve?
Interesting...
My problem is that if the frontal lobes of the brain continue evolving, maybe there would or should be a certain compensatory loss of physical abilities, loss of muscular strength, loss of certain digestive abilities, (as with the loss of wisdom teeth), and so on... Our skeletons have grown taller, but frailer than those of the middle ages.
The paradox is that every year, we still assist to new sports world records...
Thank you professor Kamal for your answer. I am a little intriggued by your conclusion. How is that so? could you perhaps tell us a little more?
Interesting...
My problem is that if the frontal lobes of the brain continue evolving, maybe there would or should be a certain compensatory loss of physical abilities, loss of muscular strength, loss of certain digestive abilities, (as with the loss of wisdom teeth), and so on... Our skeletons have grown taller, but frailer than those of the middle ages.
The paradox is that every year, we still assist to new sports world records...
I completely agree with Kamal, in his first post, that our brain will become more sophisticated and advance with the evolution process!
I think it, according to Charles Darwin theory!
http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
http://www.livescience.com/474-controversy-evolution-works.html
Maria, I'm sure you meant 'witness', not 'assist' (which in English means 'to help', but is a French word meaning 'to witness' or 'to attend')
I'm sure you and Kamal got it right - the evolution of the human brain was speeded up by the interplay between language and the resulting complexification of the environment which in turn led to more language, in turn further complexifying the environment (See Christopher Wills's fascinating book 'The Runaway Brain'.)
This trend is accelerating - our manmade environment is ever more complex (reflected by evolving language - Cicero's Latin and Anglo-Saxon both had about 38K words, modern English has over a million.)
So the future is higher IQs, more fragile bodies (and perhaps more body specialization leading to occasional sports prowess)
A species has a lifetime of about 10 miljon years. After that period the mutations become lethal and cannot resist to the environmental pressure. However our the lifetime of our species will be much shorter unless we take care of our planet
@Guido, could you please comment your statement of the ten millions of years. I´m convinced that in such a long period the genom experiences a lot of mutations which could be letal for an individuum but can also help to prolongue the life time of the species.
Hello, again.
Yes, Chris Ransford, Thank you for correcting my English. (I was half asleep, earlier this morning, after too little sleep, and overworked and my under evolved brain started to mix latin and English verbs... To "assist" in Portuguese, after the latin, means to "witness" as you well observed. Hopefully, my brain gradually evolves throughout the day, to a more poliglothic state, in the evening, as I comfortably lay back in my sofa, and rest my muscles to let my intelectual activities regain life...)
Thank you for the correction!
And on my return to this question, I notice that there is a parallel evolution of the motion ability of the hands and thumbs, in parallel with the evolution of the brain weight (or the skull volumetric capacity). This happens, at least since the Australopitaecus Afforensis, up to the modern days. With modern technologies, the thumbs are used endlessly, and more than ever. In Japan, they speak of the "thumb generation", to evoke the new generation of teenagers with endless repetitive thumb motions.
So, some physical activities also evolve.
Kind regards, Maria
Yes, Hanno, and Guido, in fact 10 million years is too short if you consider the lifespan of hominids... for as much as I know, Hominids date back to more than 30 million years. Are we to be considered a different new species, in terms of genetic code?
Yes, but in parallel with selective differences in our physical body, and the emergence of new locomotor diseases, such as finger tendinitis, repetition strain injuries of the hands, and the latest orthopedic news tell us of a new disease called the «cell-phone-neck»...
The human body is adapting to new technologies, invented by those smarter brains.
Abrams has been thinking about this a lot too. (This is why ants and self-organization are an interesting topic, too.)
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2015/04/24/401931739/a-new-way-to-think-about-god
Thanks dear Brenda for the late but dedicated answer. You will understand my question because I always am looking for reasons in standard natural sciences.
Our article published in peer-reviewed Journal "Communicative & Integrative Biology". A few major points discussed in the paper:
(1) Brain is not the source of consciousness.
(2) Consciousness is ubiquitous in all living organisms, starting from bacteria to human beings.
(3) The individual cells in the multicellular organisms are also individually cognitive entities.
(4) Proposals like “artificial life”, “artificial intelligence”, “sentient machines” and so on are only fairytales because no designer can produce an artifact with the properties like internal teleology (Naturzweck) and formative force (bildende Kraft).
(5) The material origin of life and objective evolution are only misconceptions that biologists must overcome.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Chemistry, Organic
- Organic