Blute Blog

Blute's blog about evolutionary theory: biological, sociocultural and gene-culture.

Archive for December 2020

Get Costs In!

leave a comment »

A lesson can be drawn from Charnov who transformed Fisher’s sex ratio theory into sex allocation theory but unfortunately the lesson has generally not spread in evolutionary theory beyond that. The lesson is that costs as well as frequencies have to be included and every time one dives deeper, one finds both again. That is the case whether we are talking about evolutionary ecology (e.g. density-dependence), social evolution (e.g. sexual selection), the origin of life, the extended evolutionary synthesis or whatever. The same point can be put in a variety of ways – costs as well as frequencies, quality (qu) as well as quantity (qa), investing as well as spending, somatic as well as reproductive functions etc. need to be included.

Both are needed and every time we dig deeper we need both again:
e.g. density dependence traditionally is qa (r) vs qu (K) but then need qa & qu of both 1
e.g. sexual selection theories are qa or qu but need both for sexual and for natural selection 2
e.g. the ‘originals’ grew (qu) as well as coming to reproduce (qa) 3
e.g. development as well as evolution must become part of the modern evolutionary synthesis 4

1 Density-Dependent Selection Revisited: Mechanisms Linking Explanantia and Explananda.  Biological Theory 11(2) 2016: 113-121.
2 Mating markets: A naturally selected sex allocation theory of sexual selection. Biological Theory 14(2) 2019: 103-111.
3 Origins and the Eco-Evo-Devo Problem. Biological Theory 1(2) 2006: 116-118.
4 Three Modes of Evolution by Natural Selection and Drift: A New Or an Extended Evolutionary Synthesis? Biological Theory 12(2) 2017: 67-71.

Written by Marion Blute

December 28, 2020 at 4:16 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with ,

Florestan Fernandes at the University of Toronto

leave a comment »

In the academic year 1969-70 as a new graduate student in Sociology at the University of Toronto I took a course in “Latin American Societies” taught by Prof. Florestan Fernandes. I had a strong interest in economic and social development in the “third world” as it was called it in those days. I had spent two years after my Bachelors degree in Psychology and English as a Canadian University Service Overseas volunteer (the Canadian version of the American Peace Corps) teaching in eastern Nigeria. I and other volunteers were horrified at the English curriculum in secondary schools and teacher training colleges. It was composed exclusively of English novels and poems. We took great pleasure in introducing the students to Nigerian novels and poetry such as Chinua Achebe’s novel Things Fall Apart and Wole Soyinka’s poetry which they very much enjoyed. (Soyinka later became the first African to win the Nobel Prize in Literature.) I had also travelled in South America in Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay and Brazil for some months. Another ex-volunteer who had been stationed there told me he thought that the people of the altiplano area there were the poorest in the world but I had told him I thought that those of the Sahelian area of Africa were so I decided to see for myself!

I had also been politically active in protesting the siege of Biafra and along with other ex-volunteers and others, in organizing a teach-in on “The Crisis in Development”. Rather than an afternoon or evening of lectures, we did the teach-in a different way. We organized four weeks of discussion groups in the community, churches, recreation centres and so on. Each of us led one group having produced four handbooks with readings and questions for discussion. A few of the readings were from works by Frantz Fanon and Ivan Illich.

I have fond memories of Prof. Fernandes and his lectures and was particularly impressed, not only by the content, but also by his academic rigour. He walked in each week and sat in a small circle with ten or so of us and read his lectures which he had previously written out in full. The lectures were eventually published in a book “The Latin American in Residence Lectures”, Toronto, University of Toronto, 1969-70 edited by Prof. Kurt Levy, a political science professor. I gather that I and another graduate student from the course assisted the editor with some comments. When Prof. Fernandes gave us pretty much free reign on topics for a paper for the course, I decide to follow up on my interest in Frantz Fanon and Ivan Illich on development and wrote arguing that there was a convergence of their views on autonomous development.

After another year, once my MA degree was completed, my interests took a somewhat different turn. I eventually wrote my PhD thesis on comparing theories of change in biology, psychology and the social sciences in the sociology department but with an interdisciplinary committee. Among other things I wrote a fairly widely cited article on “Sociocultural Evolution: An Untried Theory” on the idea that culture and social organization and not just genes “descend with modification”. For example, the languages within each of some two hundred language families have descended with modification from a common ancestral language. I taught at the University of Toronto, The University of Western Ontario (now Western University) and eventually returned to the University of Toronto as Associate Professor, then full Professor then Emeritus (retired)  Professor even though I am still active. In 2010 I also published a book with Cambridge University Press, “Darwinian Sociocultural Evolution: Solutions to Dilemmas in Cultural and Social Theory”.

Looking back now on the paper I wrote for Prof. Fernandes’ course (which I actually managed to find a copy of when asked by Diogo Valença and which he had published translated into Portugese along with this note in Novos Olhares Socials – UFRB V 3(2) 2020) my most egocentric memory is that he tried to give me a grade of 100 to which the powers that be objected so I ended up with a grade of 90 which was fine with me! But reading through the paper now, I don’t think I would change the substance at all – autonomy in development is as important as ever. And today the pandemic problem (hopefully in the short run), and the climate crisis in the longer run, are the two most important problems facing us all. I have every confidence Prof. Fernandes would agree with that as well were he still with us.

Written by Marion Blute

December 23, 2020 at 4:42 pm

More Transmissible Mutants of COVID-CoV-2 Likely to be Less Rather Than More Damaging

leave a comment »

In a post here on May 3 and in a post on the on-line magazine TVOL here
(https://evolution-institute.org/gene-culture-and-potential-culture-gene-coevolution-the-future-of-covid-19/)
I suggested that the virus COVID-CoV-2 could well evolve to become more transmissible. Three broad classifications of mechanisms were mentioned – increases in maintenance, motility and mutability. This now seems to have occurred in London and south-east England although the mechanism remains unknown. This is not just an “I told you so” but also to add another prediction. Mutants of the virus that successfully spread are likely to cause the disease COVID-19 to become less rather than more damaging and fatal. This is because it is not in the virus’ interest to keep one down and unable to circulate let alone kill its victims along with itself.

Written by Marion Blute

December 20, 2020 at 5:11 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with

What is the Objective of Life? Grand Offspring of Course.

leave a comment »

An organism does not have a life cycle, it is a life cycle. What is its objective? Not simply a duplicate set of genes, that’s for sure. Consider a simple semelparous life cycle – i.e. one that grows and develops then produces offspring all at the end. When has that life cycle been repeated or reproduced? When some or all of the offspring have grown and developed then produced offspring of course – i.e. when grand offspring have been born.

Written by Marion Blute

December 14, 2020 at 3:13 pm