* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download File - Queen of the South
Natural selection wikipedia , lookup
Sexual selection wikipedia , lookup
Objections to evolution wikipedia , lookup
Mormon views on evolution wikipedia , lookup
Population genetics wikipedia , lookup
Sociocultural evolution wikipedia , lookup
Hindu views on evolution wikipedia , lookup
Creation and evolution in public education in the United States wikipedia , lookup
State switching wikipedia , lookup
Punctuated equilibrium wikipedia , lookup
Hologenome theory of evolution wikipedia , lookup
Unilineal evolution wikipedia , lookup
Creation and evolution in public education wikipedia , lookup
Acceptance of evolution by religious groups wikipedia , lookup
Catholic Church and evolution wikipedia , lookup
Biological Evolution 136 Chapter Three Biological Evolution Evolution is one of the great unifying concepts in Biology. In general, without any specific designations, the word evolution means an unfolding or unrolling, a development, a revelation or unveiling. As a term of a scientific theory and in its restricted sense, it is commonly understood as organic evolution. This conceives that all the various plants and animals existing at the present time have descended or evolved from simpler organisms by a series of gradual or sudden modifications both structural and functional. There are two pertinent questions which, arising from rational wonder, interrupt the joy of the intuitive contemplation of an organic evolution. They are its How? and Why? The mechanism adduced by many biologists to explain organic evolution may be described as a kind of natural selection acting on inheritable variations of a population. The raw materials of evolution are the mutations in chromosomes and genes. Some sort of isolation, geographic, genetic, or ecological seems necessary for the setting up of new species. Natural selection is a choice. It does not create new characteristics. It plays a part in choosing and determining which new characteristics shall survive. Gene and chromosome mutations can be produced naturally or artificially by a variety of agents. Genetic engineering is nothing new, but who? or what? is the engineer. Aseity answers the Who?, her selflife answers the What? From what we know today of the seeming fickle nature of so much genetic material in living things and also the continual harassing pressure of a mutation-effecting environment, it is something to be marvelled at as to how any living organism retains any semblance of stability. Some other’s immanence dictates set order from its selffunctioning self-evolving presence. The concept of natural selection is central to modern theories of biological evolution. Natural selection is generally associated with an organism’s survival and reproductive success in response to environmental pressures which result in the adaptation of a species to a specific environment. Theories of natural selection in the origin of species (species only) can be made plausible if they are based on some factual evidence concerning the advent of certain new species from older species of already existing types. Nevertheless most explanations ultimately pose more questions than they answer. Biological Evolution 137 The genesis of completely new classes of living things from preexisting ones precedes any natural selection within already formed species and is still shrouded in mystery. If, as thought and taught by many scientists, the process were gradual, being built up by a series of small adaptive changes, then it is argued by many others that the fossil evidence should be replete with an abundance of such intermediary or transitional forms. Such is not the case. Indeed all the evidence is to the contrary of Darwinism’s theory of cumulative processes so slow that they take between thousands and millions of decades to complete. Aeons of time do not seem to have been necessary for the evolution of new classes from older ones. Their appearance is sudden, their links with what would have been expected in a slow process are missing from fossil records. In their absence, one can not be blamed for concluding that they never existed and that Mother Nature effected new classes in selected begotten mutations of immediate eventuality. Progressive and rapid evolution within any species could well be assured by a favourable mixing of some different strains in various environments and then compounding their hereditary modifications. Cellular asexual or non-sexual reproduction has been on this earth ever since the very first selflife manifested its self-functioning there. Physics and Chemistry prepared the way for Biology and are essential to it. With the sacrifice of some of their mass, fundamental dualized particles serve as or help to build up the nucleons (protons and neutrons) which in turn serve to build up other atomic nuclei. The latter, clouded with potential-reducing electron-charge, are formed into individual atoms which under favourable reduced energy conditions then come together to form molecules. Atoms and molecules, either neutral and dipolar, or charged as ions, can become integrated or made to coalesce, usually by attractive, potentialreducing electrostatic forces and select catalysts to form one, two or three dimensional lattices. With types of one dimensional lattices aggregates known as polymers or macromolecules arise with possibilities of new spatial arrangements involving coiling and twisting. Among the most important and fundamental of these are the complex proteins and nucleic acids which form colloidal-state collectivities of organelles like chromosomes. The latters’ spiralling double-threaded, mirrorsymmetrical helices make for a mother-twin-daughter fission process Biological Evolution 138 under select energy level and catalytic stimuli, and reproduction is rendered possible in what then become living cells. The intrinsic beauty of this ordered procession engages our contemplation, until the child in us grows distracted and begins again to question in wonder. Just how did not-yet-existent beings relate to their own eventual future becomingness? Growth in complexity in any closed system is self-functioning but also is other-dependent and requires catalysts and extra energy from some outside source. It was observed on Page 44, that all biological cell reproduction, in the strict sense of the word reproduction as meaning producing exact copies of itself, is asexual. Sexual reproduction is really a misnomer. Sexuality is a requirement for efficient propagation, but it is not precisely a true reproductive process. It exhibits a plurality of functions in the cause of adaptation and the perfectioning of already existing species, whilst being indispensable in the initiating of new individuals, and hence possible new species. Reproduction or replication makes two of the same sort from just the one single and same parent. The latter, as mother, loses its complete individuality in the formation of two such new potential mothers who now continue the process. Life itself manifests this never ending maternal fruitfulness in which there is no place for death, except through accident. Sexuality, on the other hand, is a means of making one different sort from two distinct parents who do not lose their individuality in the process but who are nevertheless doomed to the extinction of death once their usefulness is expended. Reproduction effects an increase in quantity by changing one into two, whilst sexual union affects quality by changing two into one, fission and fusion, distinction and union. Cells are united into groups which in turn become differentiated into various tissues. These serve the distinct and very diverse organs which integrate to form complete living organisms. Evolution does not cease here. Organisms gather together into societies, and the process continues in ever-expanding spheres of unified diversity and increasing coherent complexity in which the type achieves a kind of potential immortality by its service to and incorporation into an increasingly interrelated and interdependent commonwealth or shared environment. After a certain stage was reached, biological evolution could only continue and progress by means of distinct new individuals who were limited by spaced time. Biological Evolution 139 From the point of view of simple organic evolution the greatest invention and revelation of Aseity in Nature is the cycle of birth and death. It is the transitory and short-lived individual who now constitutes the rudimentary elements of progressive biological evolution. With the advent of the distinctioning male, sexuality and its consequence of the eventual death of the new individual, became the novel means to evade the rigidly conservative traditions dominating, and as it were, enslaving the inorganic universe. Thus was prepared a way for a furtherance of freedom of activity and emancipation from too much outside dependence culminating in human liberty and in self’s ability to choose this and-or that, especially in hypothetical if...then... situations. There are unaccountable mysteries in the developments of evolution whereby organs appear, seemingly invented by an extraordinary genetic engineering to purposely increase the freedom of the individual and its independence, with respect to an interdependent environment. Aseistic evolution pressed on in the past with a lavish differentiation towards an upward spiralling goal, not satisfied with a range of beings extending from those merely capable of existing, to those perfectly adapted to their surroundings. For example, the appearance of homoiothermism or constant temperature in birds is an extraordinary and unmistakable liberation from slavery to the environment. It has all the hallmarks of a suddenly begotten mutation. So also has sexuality. Sexual two-in-oneness is the great servant of evolution. It does not serve directly, as its end, mere biological reproduction which is antecedently accomplished in living cells by stimulated mitotic fission. Mitosis is cell division when each daughter cell has the same number of chromosomes as the parent-mother. Diploid cells such as zygotes, have nuclei containing two sets of chromosomes. Haploid cells such as gametes, have nuclei containing only one set of chromosomes. In the reduction division of meiosis, the daughter cells have only haploid sets of chromosomes. Sexuality represents Nature’s most ingenious dualistic method of ensuring the perfection of existing individuals and future ones as well. For the sake of economy and convenience, sexual biunity is incorporated into a propagative cycle at its most efficacious moment, whilst still remaining, however, functionally distinct from mere reproduction. The driving tendency of living things to adapt themselves is a manifestation of a search for equilibrium similar to that observed in Biological Evolution 140 the inorganic world. There, a system always tends towards a state of equilibrium corresponding to the minimum of free energy which is compatible with its total energy. In already formed members of a class of living things this equilibrium tendency towards a nonevolutionary slothful self-sufficiency is prevented by an immanent otherness programming. This latter’s need finds natural fulfilment through haploid fission and subsequent diploid fusion with an other. New characteristics are introduced into older species, whilst at the same time there is provided the possibility of developing completely new ones and even new types of living things by chromosomal gene mutation. Thus the equilibrium barrier is continually being broken. In actual biological propagation, sexual distinction and union is merely a conditional occasion for any increase in quantity. It is a functional element for diversity. It is the efficient cause for quality, sometimes for better, and often unfortunately for worse. Evolution, through sexuality, guarantees that in more ways than one, some of the good will get better and that many of the bad will get worse. If the transitory or limited self-perpetuating powers of two relatively unrelated parent organisms are joined together through union of their genetic material or genes, then the resulting offspring may acquire a survival or perfectioning potential which is far greater than that of either parent alone. They could be worse off too. They may acquire a double share of undesirable qualities which may hasten their demise and bring about the eventual deterioration and destruction of the particular strain. Sexistential relativity is fundamental to Nature. As a unique biological unity of distinction and union, it is observed in some very early levels of life, not as begetting a new member of some species, but as perfecting only existing ones by exchange of gene sets as in the protozoon Paramecium, or in the cold-resisting zygospore of Spirogyra. In these and all other organisms, humans not excluded, sexual union and propagation are equally distinct, even though for efficiency the two processes do link together. Accompanying the sexual process, there is a real but poorly understood protoplasmic rejuvenation on the biochemical metabolic level. Hormone exchange, stress reduction and psychical as well as physical rejuvenation can be important aspects of orgasmic sexuality for adult humans and also, as now verified, among fish, birds and animals. Reproduction is conservative. By it, parental characteristics are passed on faithfully in the mother-twin-daughter fashion from Biological Evolution 141 generation to generation as long as the surroundings are favourable. Sexuality, on the other hand, is a liberating process. It helps survival under changed or new conditions and by combining the best features of both parents can introduce doubly advantageous material into the resulting organisms. It thus has adaptive and perfectioning value for both already existing, and also possibly improved future individuals who will in time spread their new advantages throughout the whole population. Freedom from blind traditions and inertial conservatism are thus secured for all time. As a cosmic symbol and in the psychical realm of affective interpersonal relations and true mystical experience, human sexuality can be raised to levels of meaningfulness which totally transcend its mere biological significance. As such it can render procreation of new individuals unnecessary and contraception, even artificial, both valid and advisable. Sexuality knows its profoundest reality in involvement with religion and selflife experience. Personal development and self-transcendence through sexual relations can and should have sacrificial connotations. To sacrifice should mean to make sacred in an act of reverential worship. For sexuality to perfect a new cultural and religious species in evolutionary ascent, we must apply such ideas of sacrifice analogously to personal relationships involving a self and its other. Unless the I-self’s grain of selflife seed die, there remains but a sterile “me and mine”, but if it submits to a psychical metamorphosis on encountering a beloved “you”, then it enjoys a more abundant life as “we, us and ours”. In the orgasm climax of sexual union there should be experienced the ecstatic pleasure of a mystical death. Biology’s sex-functioning introduces limits bringing eventual death to the individual’s body and likewise psychologically, there should be exacted a similar transition with respect to the individual self’s conscious personal life. This is the self-sacrificial price that has to be paid for Nature’s selective growth in unity and complexity. Sexual fertility, with its potential for an increased quality and diversity in the fruits of its union, requires ultimately the sacrificial surrendering of the fleshmasked personal individuality of both its participants. Biologically, the male’s sole function is to provide a distinctioning and fertilizing sperm in a moment of time. An adult testis is stable both in structure and role and secretes only one hormone to promote and maintain masculinity. On the other hand, woman’s endocrine control of phase-linked sexual functioning is much more Biological Evolution 142 involved and far more highly evolved. It is to the mother’s s-f-f-s that a future generation owes its becomingness. Though male and female are correlatives and complementary parts of a cosmic duality, it must always be remembered and understood that in human sexual relativity, man’s role is to serve woman with distinction in union. Aseistic evolution as a progressive revelation is opposed in many respects to adaptation which is strictly conservative and opts to get out of the erratic race. Paradoxically, evolutionary development would seem to have both constructive and destructive aspects, manifesting not only a retrogressive entropic aspect towards uniformity and directional irreversibility, but also a progressive tendency towards greater distinction in unity as if a series of goals had to be attained. There is displayed a fine purposefulness and prodigality whereby Nature seems not content that there should be mere life, but that it should abound both in quantity and quality of increasingly sophisticated and selected improbable types. Biological evolution begins with amorphous living matter or things like Coenocytes which are without a real defined cell structure, and ends in social human beings endowed with freedom and an expanding selflife consciousness, in which there is an increasing awareness of an inner revealing and loving maternal otherself. The three phases of mutation, adaptation and a rational sort of natural selection, functioning progressively together in that order are simple mechanisms which have contributed at times to a gradual blossoming or lateral unfolding of Nature’s revelation, without in themselves being in any way vertically progressive. They are not determining factors in general ascending evolution. The criterion of adaptation is usefulness in the present. A vital criterion of aseistic evolution is freedom for the future. It seeks a progressive liberating from entropy’s anarchy and the suicidal randomness of unordered independence to a freely chosen and ordered symbiotic interdependence of one self with others. The cliché, adapt or perish, is a half-truth. If it really means abandoning a selfish independence in a self-only-survival situation and adaptively adopting an altruistic interdependence with others, not only for common survival but for self-perfecting growth, then such prudent adaptation is beneficial all round. It must always be remembered that such adaptation demands a self-sacrificial negative feedback for true success and spells the end of entropic self-only interest. Adapting oneself to become a unit part of a fertile whole Biological Evolution 143 unity means perishing as a sterile individual. Generally this is not the understanding which evolutionists have in mind when they speak of adaptation. More often than not, they are referring to mere changes in habits or habitats, like adapting to new food chains or climatic conditions. When the equilibrium constituting their perfect adaptation still as individuals has been finally reached, living things naturally cease to be transformed. As long as the environmental situation is not sufficiently modified to make further adaptation necessary and thus as long as the equilibrium is not violated, no further evolution is required and indeed, if such adaptation is the only goal, then no further evolution is possible. Much of the fauna and flora observable in Nature, though they are masterpieces of ecological adaptation, are but in fact the mere leftovers of progressive evolution. Only one stock amongst all the others never arrived at adaptation’s equilibrium and not merely survived but culminated in what we humans call ourselves. It is not the thing best adapted to its environment which contributes favourably to evolution. It is true that its chances of survival are thus much higher, but its better adaptation excludes it from any upward spiralling progression and only increases the number of dropout quasi-stagnating species which inhabit the earth. In its passage through the sea, over mountains and across deserts towards its destined Promised Land, Aseity’s if...then...vertical evolution progresses or struggles from one instability to another and would cease if it gave up the struggle, not just for mere existence, but for more and more existence or selflife on a higher level of complexity. Natural environments may change and those things which were the fittest in a former situation may find the new conditions quite harmful. Adaptation then works to offset its own previous efforts, and natural selection tends now to choose to do away with those whom before it had encouraged. In all such cases, adaptation is certainly not progressive but conservative, selfprotective and defensive. Paradoxical situations emerge revealing that some of the theoretical and seemingly plausible mechanisms that are ascribed to Nature in evolution actually militate against the very process for which they are supposed to account. Freedom from being a slave of the environment, freedom from the necessity of having ever to adapt, freedom to be able to adapt the environment to our own rational needs, these are the ends which Aseity, in her selflife revelation, seems to have set out to achieve and Biological Evolution 144 to a certain extent has achieved in us, sometimes for better and often for worse. For people disposed to see it this way in a contemplated and comprehensive overall view, evolution has all the manifestations of being a choice, always made in the same direction, ascending towards fixed goals amongst which freedom of activity in systems of increasing selflife is a dominating consideration. It is with certain mutants amongst whole populations of individuals that such a choice seems to be made. Many, or all, are called for the new adventure but only a relative few are actually chosen. Aseity randomly selects whom she wishes, for what she wishes, when and where and how she wishes. She does this often with a revolutionary touch of typical, unpredictable feminine humour and teasing caprice, which misunderstanding masculine minds might consider quite irrational. This interpretation of the concept Natural Selection is different from that as understood by many orthodox Neo-Darwinians. The increasing liberty among living things is evident if one begins from one-celled organisms and considers such factors as locomotion and dependence on the environment with respect to such things as saline medium, temperature and food. The real menace of destruction by other species demands liberating new developments as does also such things as freedom from the necessity of using hands for walking and for digging. Biological evolution climaxes in the female placental mammal. Culturally, it continues in the psyche where there is the liberation, through programmed speech and memory, from the old time-consuming gene method of passing on favourable acquired characteristics and useful experience. Modern electronic computers aid their cerebral counterparts in the rapid processing and utilizing of information. Finally we have personal liberty in the human self’s will-powered choice of that unity in positive plural becomingness whose truth sets us free from the disorders of singular virgin existence. The perfection of liberty does not lie in inertial sterile independence, but in willed fertile interdependence. The real problems in theorizing about evolution do not arise in the history of a genus or species, but in the formation of the much broader phyla and classes. There are numerous forward and upward non-adaptive jumps in evolution which defy any Darwinian, mechanistic or statistical explanation and which all bear the hallmarks of the immediate activity of a manufacturer and operator Biological Evolution 145 of Do-it-yourself Kits. To such a begetter we have assigned the personal name Aseity. She is both an artist and a scientist, skilled in chemical, mechanical, electrical and genetic engineering and an absolute wizard at cerebral computer programming. Already two of these extraordinary leaps have been noted as with constant blood temperature in birds and animals and the introduction of sexuality into propagation processes. Others of note in Nature’s long list of wonders are the passage from monocellular beings, the Protozoa, to the Metazoa composed of many kinds of cells, specialized to perform new particular tasks. Among the characteristics of living things are properties such as metabolism, movement, and irritability or response to stimuli. The development of chemicals and structures for these functions presupposes knowledge of some end in view. Enzymes and hormones are essential parts of living systems whose self-functioning presupposes their existence. They are not just fortuitous findings amid an abundance of wild isolated compounds in a disordered chemical junk yard. Are such systems capable of conceiving themselves by the operation of a fictional natural magic, called chance, which in theory is blind, chaotic and has no real existence, and yet in practice sees and knows everything and invents the most extraordinary ordered complexities with relentless regularity, contrary to all thermodynamic restrictions? No intelligent and unbiased person could possibly object to the basic idea that from just mere simple beginnings, and somehow or other, by a succession of gradual transformations the more complex living things eventually evolved. Just how this happened is the subject of much conjecture. In the past study of Natural History, such evolutionary ideas had often been proposed, but it was not until after Charles Darwin elaborated his Theory of The Origin of Species that major controversies arose when explanations based on chance began to be voiced. At the risk of incurring the ill will of many academics, this writer dares to assert that the introduction of the word chance into Biological Science as an accepted fact rather than as a novel fiction, is one of the great cultural deceptions of our time. So too is the insistence on the actual existence somewhere out there in space of a mythological daddy god . In theorizing about physical processes, the concept of randomness or free movement of particles must be taken into account. Random mutations are continually occurring in Nature. Randomness means relational freedom from other restraints. It is improperly Biological Evolution 146 conceived as some kind of sophisticated chance which is now made respectable from its mistakenly imputed mathematical associations. We design special machines that function non-randomly, yet generate approximations to theoretical randomness. The motion of particles in a gas can be understood as random or free. The effects such motion brings about are not occasioned by chance. Biologists project their own personal consciousness onto Nature and into their theories of evolutionary processes. Hence we have approaches which range from reductionist differentiation to holistic integration, from a selfish survival of the fittest to the altruistic symbiosis of self-other-functioning feedback systems. It is a much jaundiced eye which only sees Nature as red in tooth and claw, and accepts violence and a wild struggle for individuals’ singular survival as the sole operative norms in evolutionary processes. There is no technological evil nor malice in the natural processes of animal metabolism which demand a necessary life-and-death food chain in a s-f-f-s. Ideas about struggle for survival and the survival of the fittest find their place in conceiving biological entropy and male territorial dominance. In the aseistic evolution of self-functioning feedbacksystems, it is the friendliest and most cooperative who ultimately triumph as a unity. Aseity has her own way of eliminating those supposedly fittest, but in fact foolish, individuals who choose to act out of step with her. Who or what dictates the selflife program by which the mutant gene develops and now functions in some new live s-f-f-s? People, blind from birth, wandering aimlessly in a picture gallery, who do not know what looking is like, nor what to look for, are in an impossible position for the successful self-development of visual aesthetic appreciation. With hindsight we observe how a fertilized egg with foresighted genes grows into a fully developed member of a particular species. We understand now the niceties of sexual propagation, but how did the first fertilized egg (or eggs) of any species get the reflexive hindsight to develop with transitive foresight the way it did and still does. Feedback trial and error processes are foresighted means to attain certain determined ends. The very existence of a success or a failure in such trial and error technologies demands that such processes be designed for a purpose. Self’s conceived self-survival demands some self who seeks survival either in or through some thing. Trial and error techniques in Biological Evolution 147 an evolving s-f-f-s imply actual foresight of the existence of possible success or failure. The degree of symbiotic incorporation into an ecologically favourable environment measures success, whilst rejection by such as unsuitable or detrimental determines failure. In all eras preceding the advent of human self-consciousness in this planet’s evolutionary development, the eventual fate of any new parts, through success or failure, would have been judged by their feedback effect on the whole system, for better or worse, for richer or poorer. It is opportune to let elementary Statistical Theory clarify the use of fictional chance. In Mathematics, a chance event is one to which a probability value can be given for its future occurrence. Such a value is assigned from the ratio of the number of favourable events to the number of possible. A probability of 1 relates to certainty, whilst a probability of zero denotes absolute non-occurrence. In this sense the word chance can be replaced by probability. Improbable means not probable or unlikely. In Mathematical procedures, the statistical measures of probability and improbability are related but are calculated differently. Probability is a measure of success, the occurrence of an event, while improbability is a measure of failure or the non-occurrence of an event. Before a mathematical chance event has some kind of foresighted existence, the probability of its future certain existence from the pure nothingness of its present non-existence is zero divided by zero, which is meaningless. Once a new event has occurred, the probability of this event having occurred is one. The probability of its occurring again in a similar way at some future time is a whole new ball game. There never was nor could be any ratio of favourable to possible before the possible events actually existed. It makes no sense to use the word probability in such a context because there is no way of listing all the future possible outcomes before they actually exist. It would seem that most chance-minded biologists and academics do not understand that probability calculations only have reference now in present time to known future possible events, not to past ones. Quantum Mechanics requires taking cognizance of an uncertainty principle and employs techniques of statistical mechanics. Whilst the outcomes and configurations of experimenting in the Quantum realm necessitate the use of Probability Theory, it can in no way be understood that these events take place by a species of chance. Biological Evolution 148 Scientists who apply Probability Theory and its associated Improbability Theory to past events are no different from science fiction writers. Any explanation that depends wholly, or even partly, on a fictional chance is only a fictional chance explanation A statistical interpretation of the Law of Entropy exacts that any system or process, left to itself, can change only in such a way as to increase the probability of the increasingly disunited state in which the system finds itself as a whole due to the increased lack of coordination of its parts. Unkempt gardens soon give way to weeds. That the system, like the garden, should return of its own accord either to its pristine state or evolve to a more complex one becomes ever more highly improbable. In practice there are infinitely more ways of getting things wrong than getting things right. The more numerous the small changes, the more accidents are statistically possible with the far greater probability of something going wrong with the system. Shaking a plentiful supply of the different parts of a watch in a container for aeons and aeons of time will wear out both the parts and the container and reduce them to rubble, but the only time the outcome will measure is a prolonged period of futility. The probability of a continual increase in entropic disorder is infinitely greater than any miraculous chance increase automatically in complexity. When any closed system is left to its own devices and selffunctioning, we can be certain that if anything can go wrong, then eventually it will go wrong. In hell’s heated thermodynamic prison from which there are no possible exits, the dice are so loaded and the cards so stacked that a random player can never ever win nor ever escape from losing. There are not enough typewriters in the world for immortal chimpanzees to play with and wear out trying to fulfil some scientist’s ambition to create a literary monkey-piece. In a world where obsolescence is inbuilt, long periods of time are more of a hindrance than a help in an upward self-functioning evolution Chance events, to which a meaningful probability of their future occurrence can be calculated from the ratio of favourable to possible, only exist in the human mathematical mindset. Statistically and scientifically Probability Theory is valid only for factual prognostic purposes NOW, in regard to FUTURE well-defined events. When applied to the past, it is not just fictional fantasy, but is also unreal and absurd. The odds of a fall of a HEAD with any fair coin are Biological Evolution 149 exactly the same now as in Caesar’s time, but the games of the past have already been played and won or lost. Predictability and probability have close associations. They both refer to possible future events, not to past events. Hindsight’s only role in probability calculations is to determine the ratio of a known number of past or present favourable events to all possible future ones in a precisely specified set of circumstances. It is inane to speak with hindsight of the mathematical probability of past improperly called chance events, like the gradual evolutionary emergence of lifeforms. It is a trivial pursuit also now for those creationists opposed to any sort of natural evolution, to try to compute the ratio of the favourable number of ways to the total possible number of ways that atoms could have been arranged in a past chance event to produce the first complex protein molecules. For us, the past has certainly occurred. Only the future is uncertain, and though we can hopefully choose at times the ways we would like it to unfold, we have no guarantee that such will eventuate. Today’s future uncertainties become tomorrow’s past certain historical realities. Seeming random selection may appear as Nature’s way of freely choosing which molecules are to be initially involved in evolutionary complex structuring, but the outcome of such experimenting is never in doubt. When Nature wants something done, nothing is left to ill-chance. Mother Nature has her own means of deciding who or what shall take part in the revolutionary outcomes of her child’s evolution. Her largess is prodigal as in egg and sperm profusion. The choreographed network pantomime acted out in the course of our species of spaced time follows definite patterns of self-otherorganization and has valid meanings for those who seek to unveil the elusive and teasing laws of Aseity herself. Laboratory accidents may occasion the appearance of new chemicals which are made, not by chance, but by the inexorable interplay of chemical and physical laws involving asymmetries and the interaction of one thing with an other. In universal relativity, no single thing, be it charge, mass, spin or particle itself is allowed to ignore its other, whether the latter be a symmetric image or not. Our limited yet expanding selflife is but a sustained living evolving echo-image in the maternal field of the extraordinary Aseity. She, as the Mother Self of the Cosmos, is immanent in and reveals her self’s projected becomingness in and with and through us, at her ovoidal being’s otherself focus. The human psyche is the Biological Evolution 150 tuner-receiver of a broad-cast selflife seed. The psychical field is as real and as elusive of explanation as any gravitational or electromagnetic field. We concern ourselves with the physical objects of knowledge without knowing what knowledge actually is in the psychical subject. We do ourselves the greatest disservice by not responding resonantly to Aseity’s acknowledged muted presence within us, wanting to make the water of our humanity blush into the wine of consciously sharing her own selflife. Whilst empirical science, professedly, may only be concerned with uncovering general laws relative to the present and its past and which are then predictable for the future, the true natural philosopher must ask and try to resolve questions about the real genesis of these laws in the past. Is there any sense in asking whether or in what way the laws of chemical composition existed before the evolution of chemicals? Are Laws of Nature the manifestations of a selflife immanence in universal mass-energy relativity which makes all otherself generation possible? Aseity’s Universal Relativity governs all her revelations of self and other functioning in her self-evolving Cosmos. Language analysis may be allowed to have the last word on questions of causal agents in evolutionary events. Words mean what we want them to mean. Selection as in Natural Selection or selection by Nature implies some sort of choice. We can select numbers at random in lotteries. We do not act blindly or mindlessly without a purpose. We have a purpose in mind, namely to win a prize. There are two necessary conditions for any selection process or cumulative procession. Selection is the name of an operation, not an operating agent. On whose agenda is the Evolution of the Cosmos listed? Selection implies, as a first condition, the existence of an actual operating agent who then, as a second condition, makes choices according to certain known or just plausible if....then.... criteria. In a whole s-f-f-s, Natural Selection operates implicitly with hindsight of the past and foresight for the future. Only some actual functioning whole s-f-f-s is capable of any sort of progressive evolution by purposeful natural cumulative selection. For some religions, Creationism as a supernatural fiction, may be more plausible than any fortuitous evolution sponsored by the irrational fiction of blind cumulative chance. The former, however, is as simplistic as the latter is absurd. The only valid and verifiable Biological Evolution 151 scientific system of real natural selection is aseistic evolution in which the infinite being of selflife energy acts from within its own enwombed becomingness. An immanent Aseity, working from within in the unity of a distinction-union relation can very simply and quite effectively initiate the creative leaps, gradual or otherwise, necessary for the appearance of new orders and fresh types of being, from already existing ones. Biological entities can automatically reproduce themselves, but initially they do not automatically invent themselves nor can they adapt themselves by themselves to new environmental situations simply by their own past genetic engineering. They need an other self to do that. They need to be part of a pre-existing, well-ordered, universal self-other-functioning-feedback-hypersystem, aptly named in the language of today’s Economics, Selflife Incorporated, or abbreviated to the more personal, Aseity Inc. The true experience of unity in the mute contemplation of the grandeur of the Cosmos and the interwoven networks and structured complexities of life on Planet Earth compels the acceptance that what has happened in the Universe is a dynamic evolution. With the whither? and whence? of such we associate two points of view, foresight and hindsight. Some of yesterday’s foresight has become today’s hindsight. Without foresight in the past we cannot have hindsight in the present, for they are the two sides of the one same coin of reflexive and transitive self-other sighting relations. Hindsight’s set of all feedback systems confounds any theories which postulate the absence in the past of their foresighted design. A trial-and-error feedback system necessarily demands some purpose in foreseeable success or failure. It is another one of the ironies of a deceptive logic in modern science that molecular biologists accept the existence of programmed genes, which by definition are unique units of hereditary hindsight data and which achieve their foresighted effects by directing the purposeful synthesis of proteins, and yet at the same time many such biologists would deny any hindsight, foresight and purpose to the evolutionary growth of genes from bits of old fashioned chemical stuff. The patterned structured growth in complexity of inorganic, organic, and cerebral psychical activity in matter-made forms follows logically if matter itself is thought of as a spaced time self-functioning otherself masquerade of the immanent self-existent self-evolving Aseity in her field unity of self-other co-consciousness in the Cosmos. Biological Evolution 152 Disillusioned academics, blinded by their own fictions, continue to pull more and more wool over the eyes of those whom they have already blindfolded and the latter, trapped in the ditches of frustration and uncertainty, become the laughing stock of philistine anti-science lobbyists. Theories of Natural Selection are quite plausible in the origin of species. A species is a group of closely related, structurally and functionally, similar organisms which in Nature interbreed with one another, but which do not interbreed with organisms of other groups. Natural selection is fundamentally a peaceful creative force, spreading genetic novelty through reproduction and sexual propagation. It does not involve struggle for existence or survival of the fittest. It does not eliminate the unfit, but is based on comparative reproductive success or differential reproduction. Science cannot validate imaginary concepts of an unpredictable fictional chance, but it does pontificate infallibly on all predictable unlucky chance events. For any system in isolation, if anything can go wrong, given enough time it will go wrong. There is no cause for pessimism. If one optimistically accepts self-other relativity’s pervading of the Universe, then aseistic evolution becomes a sexbased two-in-one comedy-romance with a happy ending - even if there are only relatively few humans left to enjoy it.