In previous reply, I wrote in the start,”Darwinian evolution is a part
rather a phase of the universal evolution”. Wherever I wrote “evolution”
alone, it did mean universal evolution.
“Universal evolution” is a theory of evolution, formulated by Pierre
Teilhard de Chardin and Julian Huxley and a similar theory by Vladimir
Ivanovich Vernadsky, that describes the gradual development of the universe
from subatomic particles to the human society.
Traditional Darwinian evolution describes a “phenotypic” basis of the
development of certain traits, which are more fit to survive and adopt,
inherit to successive generation by the natural selection. Darwin was
unfamiliar with the work of Gregor Mendel, who provided the genetic
(genotypic) basis to the biological evolution.
In the 20th century, genetic basis, mutation, genetic reshuffling and
genetic drift were integrated in the Darwinian evolution.
So we still use the term
“Darwinian evolution”, despite this theory has been gone through an
evolutionary process itself.
Struggle for survival is the central theme of biological evolution
from earliest single cell organism to the human being, so there must
be only one logical end point and that is end of mortality.
Darwinian evolution is no more at the mercy of the natural selection, it is
now determined by human brain.
It is quite frustrating when somebody with a scientific approach says, human
is the end product of the Darwinian evolution and it has little effects on
the human, without telling, what is beyond that end point.
I am sure that in future a group of people with a very long lifespan will
appear and they will be considered as next higher species in the Darwinian
Once we get the complete knowledge of the aging and death and find the
solution then the definition of “immortality” might be revised.
Immortality can be is defined in such a
philosophical way as “because of continuous change, nothing in reality
can be truly
But change does not mean mortality.
On 9/19/14, Paul Wakfer wrote:
> Our difference here is, as so often with people, a difference between
> the technical meaning of “Darwinian Evolution” and the English
> vernacular meaning of “evolution”.
> I totally agree with your application
of the vernacular meaning of
> evolution, but I disagree that those descriptions fit the meaning of
> Darwinian Evolution. Yes evolution meaning:
> “a series of related changes in a certain direction *:* process of
> change *:* organic development *:* unfolding
> , movement
> ” or
> even “a process of continuous change from a lower, simpler, or worse
> condition to a higher, more complex, or better state” or “a process of
> gradual and relatively peaceful social, political, and economic advance
> or amelioration”
> is a process that is ongoing for humans. And yes, Darwinian Evolution is
> certainly a specialized type of “evolution” in the vernacular meaning.
> However, the specific mechanism behind Darwinian Evolution is going to
> have very little effect on future humans, IMO.
> i think we have thrashed this out enough, so this will be my last
> PS. Immortal:
> 1*:* not mortal *:* exempt from liability to die
> 2*:* connected with or relating to immortality
> 3*:* destined to persist through the ages *:* exempt from oblivion *:*
> , abiding
> Because of continuous change, nothing in reality can be truly immortal!!
> On 14-09-18 04:12 PM, hasan sadiq wrote:
>> I respect every disagreement.
>> Darwinian evolution is a part rather a phase of the universal
>> evolution, deals with the lifeform on the earth.
>> Human being, due to its brain, is the most advanced and recent
>> lifeform in the Darwinian/univresal evolution.
>> I am sure everybody would agree that evolution is infinite.
>> Then what would be the next in the evolution?
>> Evolution occur in a pyramidal design.
>> Upto the evolution of human brain, nature had been controlling the
>> evolution through natural selection, now human brain begins to get the
>> control over the nature. Consciouseness of human brain is going to
>> determine the direction of evolution.
>> Brain enhancement does not mean only structural or physical change, or
>> its capacity to having intuition and highest wisdom but its capacity
>> to prese