Posted by stmx3 on February 13, 2004 at 10:41:06:
In Reply to: Re: 2 questions posted by cjb on February 13, 2004 at 00:58:06:
: Dear Phil and David,
: Thanks for the answers.
: The graphs are fascinating. It all looks very smooth and non punctuated (for what it's worth). I guess the speciation is really what the Gould/Dawkins debate hinges on- and as you pointed out, speciation really hasn't occured yet.
In a way, Darwinian Poetry has already undergone punctuated evolution. First, there was no DP, and then quite suddenly, David punctuated it into existence! And, it sounds like PE goes on as new versions are introduced. So, philosophically, does PE in this context have the same meaning as it does in watching poems evolve as votes are cast?
I would say that if PE were real, it's brought on more by change in environment than in slow accumulation of "data" over time. Consider what happens when V3 is introduced. Even though there may be a whole new data set of words, it is the rules of the game that will have evolved. You would be able to trace their heritage back to V1 and see their mutations occurring in this news forum.
So, even though the initial data set will change, words are words and they are the chunks of DNA in this program. Only their environment (which is based on the rules, among other things) changes. So, whatever happens, whether good or bad for the Darwinian Poetry concept, some punctuated change will occur.
BTW, there's a good SF book out about the human race undergoing punctuated equilibrium...by Baxter or Brin (one of those hard SF 'B' authors...maybe Barnes?). Wait...maybe not Baxter, because he just came out with a really really great book about human evolution, going waaaay back in time and waaaaay forward in time. It's interesting how we turn out.