gay "biology"

cates at cates at
Tue Jul 8 15:51:00 EST 1997

>   flefever at Frank LeFever) writes:
>  In <33C0D867.46AE at> "John H. Casada" <casad at> writes:
>  >F. Frank LeFever wrote:
>  >><snip>
>  >> Remember: it is not the individual's advantage, but the species'
>  >> advantage.  
>  >As the evolutionists have repeatedly hammered me with this, I will 
>  >pass it on to you.  Current evolutionary theory states that it is 
>  >indeed the individual's advantage and not the species'.  Natural 
>  >selection takes place at the individual and not species level.
>  >This does not present an insuperable obsticle, though.  It is to the 
>  >individual's advantage to see his genetic material passed on, even if 
>  >it is done indirectly through close kin and not by his direct 
>  >production of progeny.
>  Someone else (from Canada) emailed me much the same message (i.e.,
>  individual not group advantage and selection) and was awaiting more
>  time and energy to think it through before replying, but you've
>  prompted me to say something, no matter how un-jelled.
>  I'm too lacking in the in-depth reading of current theory to do much
>  more than wing it, but given the eventual acceptance of some ideas
>  previously sounding off-the-wall (e.g. non-chromosomal inheritance),
>  I'm not ready just now to call it a closed issue.
>  My thoughts:
>   a species is not a collection of clones, but an aggregation of
>  genotypes with genes shared and unshared to varying degrees, but to the
>  extent that the heritance of some common core is promoted by the
>  existance of individuals with more-than-usual unshared or sparsely
>  distributed characteristics, I can see the possibility of continuity as
>  a species but also shifts in the distribution of shared
>  characteristics, i.e. evolution of the species.

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list