Genetic control of life (E O M - 8)

MYTH PERCEPTION THREE

(Ref. Book – Excerpts from Spontaneous Evolution, Authors: Bruce H. Lipton and Steve Bhaerman)

As repeatedly propagated by Swami Vijnananand, we have been mentioning in these blogs the role of mind, the importance and inevitability of mind's role for inclusion in the scope of science. Such opinions are echoed by a few scientists and thinkers in the 21^st century. Next blog to follow aso cover this topics.

When Darwin put forth his heredity-based theory of evolution, the premise that traits were passed from parent to child made perfect practical sense to anyone who bred animals, like beget like.

Because the Newton view at the time emphasized the primacy of matter, it was seemingly assured that the secret of life would be encoded within the body’s own molecule.

Shortly after the turn of 19^th century, American geneticist and embryologist Thomas Hunt Morgan deduced that genetic factor that control heredity traits are arranged along the chromosome in a precise linear order. Further chemical analysis revealed that chromosomes are compresses of proteins and Deoxyribo Nucleic Acid (DNA). However the question as to whether the genetic key was the protein or the DNA remained until 1944 when Oswald Avery, Colin Mac Leod, and Maclyn McCarty (researchers from Rockefeller) determined empirically that DNA was the molecule that determined heredity traits. While this study was the first to distinguish DNA as the heredity-controlling molecule, it did not offer any insight into how DNA accomplished this feat.

In 1953, Watson and Crick changed the course of human history when their article was published in the British scientific journal ‘Nature’. Based on the nature of DNA coding mechanism, they posited (postulated) the concept known as ‘central dogma of molecular biology’. This is also referred to as ‘the primacy of DNA’. Central dogma mapped the flow of information in most biological systems being one directional: from DNA to RNA to protein.

Even before Watson and Crick were born, science had concluded that an assembly of physical molecules controls life. The only unanswered question was: “which molecule would it be”? When Watson and Crick reported their DNA results, the decision was a slam dunk (a task in which the success is deemed a certainty): DNA molecules control life.

Amazingly, biologists immediately adopted this central dogma hypothesis even though its validity was never assessed. But was this DNA primacy really true?

The key implication in this is: heredity information only flows in one direction, from DNA to RNA to Protein and never goes to the opposite direction. Which means protein cannot influence the structure and activity of the DNA code.

Here is the problem: the body that experiences life is made out of protein; because proteins cannot send information of life’s experience back to DNA, then environmental information cannot change genetic destiny. This means that genetic information is disconnected from the environment.

Genetic determination is the belief that genes control all of our traits-physical, behavioral, and emotional. Simply it is the belief that our fates are locked in our genes and because we cannot change our genes, we are truly, so they say, victims of our heredity.

However as the time went on, new discoveries undermined the surety of that belief. In the late 1960s, University of Wisconsin geneticist Howard Temin put forward his research publication which suggested that RNA information could flow backward and alter the host cell’s DNA code. Though Temin findings were not accepted initially, he ultimately shared the Nobel Prize in Physiology. Temin’s work broke the backbone of Crick’s central dogma by proving that hereditary information flows in both directions. The hereditary changes can be made by design or environmental influence and not only by accidental mutation as had been presumed.

By 1990, as reported by Duke University biologist H. Frederik Nijhout, genes are not ‘self-emergent’ and cannot ‘turn themselves on and off’. Genes are just like books. They don’t read themselves. Then who is responsible for reading genes? In Nijhout’s words: “When a gene product is needed a signal from its environment activates the expression of that gene”. Simply put ‘environmental signal controls gene activity’.

Epigenetics:

Biomedical sciences are being philosophically transformed by the new science of Epigenetic control. It describes how gene activity and cellular expressions are ultimately regulated by information from the external field or influence rather than by the internal matter of DNA.

Though this truth that genes do not control their own activity, was established more than 20 years back, basic science books, media, and especially the pharmaceutical industry continue to resist the movement away from the central dogma. They, thus perpetuate the layperson’s view that genes control their lives.

Mainstream media continues to focus on the concept that genes are controlling our lives. Every day new articles claim that gene has been found to control this trait or that trait. The concept of genetic determinism is so (deep and full of resonance) with the prevailing basal paradigm (basic pattern) that even irrefutable scientific proof cannot dislodge it.

Mind and Epigenetics:

The science of epigenetics recognizes that the environment, not the DNA in nucleus, determines the action of the cell. Information from the environment is translated into biological responses via the action of cell membrane, which acts as the cell’s skin as well as its brain. The description of the cell membrane is same as computer chip. The cell as well as the computer; both are programmable. And the programmer is always outside the mechanism. Who can be the biological programmer? Who or what is the genius behind the genes? The genius behind the genes is none other than our own minds, our own thoughts and beliefs.

The process of Nature and Nurture is what shapes human mind through thoughts and beliefs. The role of the mind assumes significant importance not only in personal health but more important holistic health. To make this role of mind more suitable, the scientific study of the mind and proper training to the mind should be the priority.

Here again we see that the new research in the initial years of the 21^st century support the views Swami Vijnananand mentioned while he wrote about the evolution and the role of mind in his books published in 1960s.

Vijay R. Joshi.

SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST (E O M - 7)

MYTH PERCEPTION 2

(Ref. Book – Excerpts from Spontaneous Evolution, Authors: Bruce H. Lipton and Steve Bhaerman)

As repeatedly propagated by Swami Vijnananand, we have been mentioning in these blogs the role of mind and the importance and inevitability of mind's role for inclusion in the scope of science. Such opinions are echoed by a few scientists and thinkers in the 21^st century. Next few blogs to follow cover these topics.

In fact, the first paper on evolution was published by French biologist Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck in 1989, the year Darwin was born. And phrases that we have attributed to Darwinism-the laws of jungle and survival of the fittest-were also well-established before Charles Darwin’s birth.

Robert Malthus was an economic philosopher. Malthus championed a pessimistic position in regards to world affairs. He set out not only to prove that the glass was half empty but also it would soon be ¾ empty, then 7/8 empty and on and on. His 1798 essay on principle of population formed the theoretical basis of Darwin’s theory. The whole Malthusian notion that evolution is driven by a bloody and brutal battle for survival has actually has no scientific merit.

Charles Lyell was the most distinguished and influential scientist in the world at that time and for good reasons. His book ‘Principle of Geology’ published in 3 volumes in 1830-33, established the science of geology and, in doing so, undermined the church’s Biblical interpretation of creation. This book, which provided the basis to Darwin for his evolution theory, contained four chapters dedicated to the Lamarck’s theory. To Lyell, evolution of the biosphere was a perfect complement to the evolution of the physical planet. The views of Lyell and Lamarck had deep influence on Darwin’s theory which he has acknowledged when he published the second edition of his ‘Journal of Researches’ in 1845.

In June 1858, Alfred Russel Walace, an English naturalist, sent Darwin a copy of manuscript titled ‘On the Tendencies of Varieties to Depart Indefinitely from the Original Type’ along with a letter requesting that Darwin review the material and, if he found it of merit, pass it on to Lyell. This manuscript was Wallace’s theory of evolution. It was brief, elegant, academic, extremely well-written and would have qualified Wallace as the “founder of evolution theory”, a title now attributable to Darwin alone. Foreseeing this problem Darwin wrote to Lyell a letter dated June 26, 1858 – “it seems hard on me that I should be thus compelled to lose my priority of many years standing …” Lyell used his status so that Darwin the aristocrat, would get first billing and Wallace, the commoner, would receive the dubious honor of being listed as second contributor.

The Theory of Evolution-officially described as the Darwin-Wallace theory-was formally at the Linnean Society of London on July1, 1858. This incident has had profound reverberations (to reecho or resound) that continue to impact us today.

From our (commoners') perspective, Wallace recognized that evolution was driven by the elimination of the weakest, while Darwin interpreted the same data as to mean that evolution resulted from the will to survive inherent in the fittest.

The difference: In a Wallace world, we would improve in order not to be the weakest, but in a Darwinian world, we struggle to acquire the status of being the best. In other words, had Wallace prevailed, there would be less focus on competition and more on cooperation.

In his later years, Darwin moved away from Academic Darwinism. Rather than emphasizing survival and struggle, Darwin readdressed his attention to focus on the evolution of love, altruism, and the genetic roots of human kindness. In addition Darwin began to credit the Lamarckian concept of the environment as the driving force in evolution. Unfortunately, Darwin’s disciples thought his new ideas were tantamount to sedition, undermining all that Darwinism had come to stand for. Darwinist simply held on to their version of the theory and dismissed Darwin’s later ideas as the consequence of his creeping senility.

Darwin’s evolution theory had unprecedented impact in the journey of humanity. Later in a meeting debate held at Oxford University in June, 1860, the dominance of the church was over powered by Science with the acceptance of Darwin’s theory by both the science and public at large. The church was forced to relinquish the torch of knowledge and, with it, control of western civilization’s basal paradigm. The future went under the control of scientific materialism.

In his 1998 article in the prestigious journal ‘Nature’, British scientist Trimothy Lenthon provided important support to the ‘Gaia Hypothesis’ formulated by scientist James Lovelock. Lovelock suggested that Earth, itself is a living entity that uses evolution to regulate its own exceedingly complex metabolism. Lenton described how the Sun has warmed by 25% since life on earth began some 3.8 billions years ago, and, yet, the planet has somehow been able to regulate its climate and buffer that huge temperature differential. Lenton suggested that benefit the system as a whole tend to be reinforced, while those that alter or destabilize the environment in an unfavorable way are restrained.

Lenton concluded that “ If an organism acquires a mutation that causes it to behave in an ‘anti-Gaian’ manner, its spread will be restricted in that it will be at an evolutionary disadvantage. Lenton is suggesting that if we humans don’t find ways to evolve that are more harmonious to the planet, we may find ourselves homeless. Those organisms that best fit the environment by contributing and supporting global harmony get to thrive.

(Here we see Swami Vijnananand's comprehensive rational foresight when he has recommended harmony with the Universe i.e. journey of a human being in the direction of ENTROPY, i.e. SAMATA, which is also reflected in three principles (Trisutri), of YAJNYA).

Journey from single cell life to Human being:

How the trillions of single celled organisms were combined to become a human?

Initially, in the early stage of evolution, all the cells in colonial organisms were carried out the same functions. However there came a time when the number of cells that comprised an organism became so large that it was no longer advantageous for all cells to do the same thing. Then individual cells in the community took on specialized jobs to support the survival of the whole organism. This division of work is termed as ‘process of differentiation’ in Biology.

The formation of multi cellular organism was, in a sense, a quantum leap in the course of evolution on this planet. The evolution has advanced further and we might be tempted to think that human organism represents the fully tweaked (fine-tuned) evolutionary endpoint. But actually the human is at the beginning of next and higher level of evolution, the emergent multi-human super organism known as ‘Humanity’.

Perhaps the most important message offered by both quantum physics and field experiments is that everything is related. The new biological imperative for humankind necessarily involves the understanding that we are all in this world together and ‘survival of the fittest’ must now give way to ‘thrival of the fittingest’. That means we must adjust human activity to that which will cause entire system to thrive. Like the single-cell organism that utilizes environmental awareness in order to emerge into more complex and efficient organism, human society must adapt a new paradigm of social and economic relationship. This means maximum expression for the individual and maximum benefit for the whole. Only the seemingly impossible reconciliation of these misconceived opposites can create the emergent human that spiritual teachers tell us is our destiny.

Note: The human consciousness (mind energy) is a part of universal consciousness (field). The journey of the universal energy is to the state of entropy where the motion shall cease to exist. The human mind must also follow this path of entropy by the proper use of the FREE WILL. This would be the way of survival with the highest. This achievement would be possible through symbiosis. That would possibly be the highest stage of mind-evolution.

Vijay R. Joshi.

ONLY MATTER MATTERS.(E O M - 6)

MYTH CONCEPTION 1: ONLY MATTER MATTERS.(Ref. Book – Excerpts from Spontaneous Evolution, Authors: Bruce H. Lipton and Steve Bhaerman)

As repeatedly propagated by Swami Vijnananand, we have been mentioning in these blogs the role of mind and the importance and inevitability of mind's role for inclusion in the scope of science. Such opinions are echoed by a few scientists and thinkers in the 21^st century. Next few blogs to follow cover these topics.

In order to examine why the materialistic attitude has been created among the scientists, we need to review the milestones of the science journey in the past.

Aristotle and other thinkers:

As the interference of church in the life proved mysterious and troublesome, the revolution based on the rational, logic based thinking got initiated in the society. The book ‘On the revolution of heavenly spheres’ by Copernicus created first challenge to the church’s authority in 1543 and marked the advent of modern scientific revolution.

The mission statement of science that time meant to “To gain an understanding of the natural order so that we can live in harmony with it”. The present (21st century?) mission of the science appears to be “To obtain knowledge that can be used to control and dominate nature”. (This is how the modern medicine controls the disease).

Essentially the scientific method involves making observation and measurements, creating explanatory hypothesis, and conducting experiments designed to test the hypotheses. The results of the experiments are then used to refine the hypothesis so they become more predictive of the experimental results. In the end predictability is the primary hallmark of the scientific truth.

Rene Descartes further called for completing the scientific reforms. He boldly suggested throwing out the existing ancient Greek beliefs and replacing them with verifiable truths. ‘Doubt everything’ said Descartes. That time the science search was only restricted to matter. The concept of invisible energy, matrix – which modern quantum physicist named “the field” and which Einstein later attributed as “the sole governing agency of matter” – was not clearly accessible to scientific observation at the time of Newton and Descartes.

Consequently, the parameters of the scientific method unavoidably limited science to the studies of the physical material world. By narrowing its focus of study and determining the non material concepts, such as spirit and mind which were out of the box of analytical science, these elements of the invisible realm were happily left to the church not subjected to the rigid rules of physical science. Thus science officially acquired the status of scientific materialism.

(This truce of distributing the ownership of matter to the science and that of non-matter to the church and creating separate kingdoms though suited to science at that time, the bad effects of negligence of science towards the spiritual realities of life are clearly seen today).

Rather than viewing the universe as controlled by spiritual forces, scientists pursued the notion that the Universe was a physical machine. To them the planets, stars, plants, and animals were merely mechanical gears in a giant clockwork mechanism.

Scientists supported the notion that God created the machine, they also believed that once the machine was set in motion, God was not personally involved in day-to-day operation.

Later the great contribution of Newton to science established the mechanics, (also known as physics) of the Universe and substantiated the Descartes theory.

Since the 1700s, three main tenets of Newtonian philosophy have shaped how scientists approached their study of the Universe.

1. Materialism: Physical matter is the only fundamental reality. Rather than dealing with unseen vital forces or spirits (viz. mind) science need to study and understand only visible physical parts. Simply stated: “All that matters is matter”.
2. Reductionism: To understand anything, take it apart and study its pieces.
3. Determinism: We (scientists) can predict and control the outcome of natural processes. An outcome can be predicted by the linear progression of the discrete (distinct, separate) events.

At the end of 19^th century the entire material universe rested on foundation of irrefutable Newtonian truth. In fact that time physicists were so pleased with themselves that they publicly acknowledged that the science of physics was complete and there was nothing more to learn. But later cracks in the mechanical world view started arriving.

Cracks to Materialism:

1. Investigation by German physicist Wilhelm Concard Roentgen of X-rays.
2. Detection of electron by Sir Joseph John Thompson and findings of Max Plank.
3. Einstein postulated the existence of Photons (1905).
4. Louis-Victor de Broglie later confirmed hypothesis that all particles of matter should also behave as non-material waves.
5. The particle-verses-wave confusion was eventually resolved with advent and establishment of Quantum Mechanics.

Einstein showed that atoms are actually not made out of matter but consist of non-material energy. Today it is fully established that physical atoms are comprised of a menagerie (collection) of sub-atomic units such as quarks, bosons, and fermions.

Jerk to “Reductionism”:

Plank demonstrated that some events cannot be linear cause-effect reaction but seem to occur simultaneously as a part of inter-acting energy matrix called “The field”. In order to understand the nature of the Universe, we must abandon reductionism and, instead, turn to holism, where-in everything interacts with everything else.

Determinism:

Science of quantum physics also dispenses with the notion of determinism. The doctrine that all events, including human choices and decisions, are predicted on a specific sequence of causal reaction that adhere to natural law. Simply stated, the determinism proposed that, with enough data, we can predict the future. Heisenberg theory of uncertainty applies to any two conjugate (joined together, coupled) variables such as position and velocity, time and energy, or angle of rotation and angular momentum. The theory implies that the measurement of one variable results in the disturbance of its conjugate partner, so that both variables can never be accurately predicted at the same time.

Existence of matter uncertainty: Not only Heisenberg theory is direct affront (open insult) to determinism, it also suggests that the existence of matter is itself, an uncertainty.

Dilemma:

This is the predicament we find our self in if we try to make sense of our world by only focusing on material realm (dominance).

What Einstein meant was that the field is the Universe’s energy matrix that governs all matter. He also said that “There is no place in this new kind of physics both for the field and matter, for the field is the only reality”.

Still, many people tenaciously (firmly) hang onto the illusion of material reality. After a century passed, in spite of the Einstein’s establishing the mass-energy equation, it is hard to reconcile with such attitude of the so-called scientists.

Spirit: Interestingly, the invisible energy field that shapes matter, as defined by quantum physicist, has the same characteristics as the invisible shaping fields that meta physicians define as “Spirit”.

Newtonian Physics not negated (invalidated): Quantum physics is a larger realm of awareness that includes and substantially adds to the information provided by the Newtonian physics. Consequently, quantum physics accounts for what was already known plus a whole new realm of heretofore-unrecognized forces that control the unfolding of our Universe.

Science can’t have a Dogma.

If the established science cannot prove the existence of ‘the field’ by their known methods, it can’t avoid acknowledging the power of invisible field. We should open an entirely new field of inquiry and challenge science to explore what it has previously ignored.

Conclusion : 

It is the “non matter mind” which matters most. Swami Vijnananand (S. V.) has clearly stated that science can't reach to the TRUTH unless it opens its doors for the entry of 'MIND'.

Vijay R. Joshi.

Dashavataras in Hinduism and EVOLUTION (E O M - 5)

The  most contentious  debates over evolution have involved religion. From Darwin’s day to the present, members of some religious faiths have perceived the scientific theory of evolution to be in direct and objectionable conflict with religious doctrine regarding the creation of the world. Most religious denominations, however, see no conflict between the scientific study of evolution and religious teachings about creation. 

Opponents   of   evolution argue that only a divine intelligence, and not some comparatively random, undirected process, could have created the variety of the world’s species, not to mention an organism as complex as a human being. Some people are upset by the oversimplification that humans evolved from monkeys. In the eyes of some, a divine being placed humans apart from the animal world. 

Science and Spirituality: Explaining evolution (article 4)

 Dr Pawan Dhar article online 28 August 2012

((http://www.earthchangesmedia.com/publish/article-9162533194.php)

Darwin's model of evolution complements a subtle message in the ancient religious texts. Do science and spirituality both point to the same trend using different examples? Does spirituality go a step beyond and predict the future? Pawan Dhar draws the parallels.

The question of spontaneous creation versus intelligent design is still unsolved. We do not have a clear understanding of how life emerged on this planet? What were the initial substances, catalysts and reaction conditions?

If we take the view that God created the world, we must justify

emergence of new variants and species. If we take the view that God

continues to create new life forms, it is important to find the energy

signature of God. If we take the view that God does not exist, then we need to provide an explanation for the unique fundamental differences between the living and the non-living.

Models of physical evolution

Though the origin of life continues to remain an enigma, the evolution

of life generally falls into the following belief systems

(i)evolution does not happen, 

(ii)evolution happens towards increasing complexity,

(iii)evolution happens towards decreasing complexity.

Studies on microbes with faster doubling rates e.g.E.coli have been particularly useful to address these issue. It is a common knowledge that evolution occurs in the form of emergence of new traits when microbes are grown under artificially controlled conditions.

Available scientific evidence supports the view that the primordial seed of life populated our planet nearly 3 billion years ago. The earliest

life forms were small ribonucleic acid molecules, capable of performing trivial biochemical tasks. With the increasing presence of favorable conditions these self-replicating RNA strings acquired a wrapper of cell membranes. With time, new cell parts sprouted giving rise to a range of cellular functions. From single cells a colony of cells working in concert arose. These were precursors of more complex aquatic life forms. Random migration towards land gave rise to terrestrial organisms.

Darwin's theory says that eukaryotic evolutionary process starting from simple organisms resulted in the emergence of more complex forms like fishes, amphibians, reptiles, aves and mammals - the upper end of mammalian spectrum being humans.

Darwin and Dashavataras in Hinduism

Interestingly, Darwin's theory not only enjoys a strong scientific

support but also finds a symbolic resemblance in several religious texts of Hinduism. Though there are delicate differences in the names, the chassis of supernatural forms is generally accepted and recognized as Dashavataras or the ten forms of Lord Vishnu (das: ten, avatar: incarnation).

.

Whether these avatars existed or not, the key message is the presence of a clear evolutionary trend from the aquatic (matsya avatar) to

terrestrial (varaha avatar) life forms, matching the Darwinian model, and symbolized by a major phenotypic change that follows every level.

Why evolution?

According to ancient Hindu scriptures, it is the fundamental desire of knowing the life-giving substance that drives evolution. This grand desire is deeply embedded in our life operating system resulting in the evolution of bodily forms followed by the evolution of mind. The evolution of mind ultimately results in the identification of oneself with highest intelligence. To support this phase of evolution two things were needed - the evolution of brain and the evolution of a neural network.

Interestingly, the evolution of intelligence seems to match the

evolution of brain. Available scientific evidence indicates that human intelligence was an outcome of more cortical neurons and synapses emerging in human brain leading to greater information processing speed.

The earliest life forms probably did not feel pain, as nervous system

was rudimentary or absent. With increasing biological complexity a need for a large scale well-coordinated activity arose. This gave birth to nervous system connecting higher brain-level controls with the local cell-level activities.

With the emergence of notochord@, subtle energy channels found a place to collaborate. In yogic parlance, they are known as chakras. With the emergence of upright posture and a vertically stiff vertebral column, the spinal cord was surmised host a number of additional chakras, from the genital organ to the brain. At every level, intelligence received a boost.

As humans evolved and survival was assured, the focus moved towards the evolution of intelligence. With the evolution of intelligence, the capability to think and concentrate received a tremendous boost. This led to the emergence of philosophy and religion (made of story, rituals and spirituality).

@(Medical Dictionary  notochord  n. A flexible rod like structure that forms the main support of the body in the lowest chordates; a primitive backbone.  A similar structure in embryos of higher vertebrates, from which the spinal column develops).

The future

Ironically, brain evolution followed by mind evolution led to more

complex behavioral outcomes than expected. Unfortunately, instead of intensifying the search for highest intelligence, the need itself got blurred and mind got more survival-oriented. 

( My remarks: Since desire is the function of mind the mind must have evolved with new desires which would have brought about changes in the brain and behavioral outcome).

The present evolution state is believed to be closest to the highest

form when physical, emotional and mental capabilities have reached peak misuse. Spiritually speaking, due to tremendous increase in human empowerment, the world has witnessed a rapid increase in environmental abuse, natural disasters, life threatening diseases and hatred. Humanity desperately needs a major reboot. And if Darwin and the scriptures are to be believed, the last phase of evolution towards highest intelligence has just begun.

NOTE: Swami Vijnananand has also given the reference of the Dashavataras in context of the evolution in some of his books, discourses.

Vijay R. Joshi

Stephen Hawking on Evolution of Mind (E O M - 4)

( I ) FROM BLOG 25: Swami Vijnanananad (S. V.) on Learning and Evolution.

Certainly,organisms have always kept up pace with the developed mind, the size of the brain and so with intelligence. Apparent retrogression (backward movement) in the transitional (intermediate) stage, reflects the requirement of personality at a given moment. But the total effect was always amelioration (improvement).

Evolution which started from the single cell progressed based on the ability of learning. With the development of the brain and intelligence the pace of development accelerated. It was evident at each stage and as of today due to the explosion of knowledge availability due to internet the evolution has arrived at a distinct stage.

This aspect, which S.V. elaborated in “What Mind Means” (for details refer to Blog: Evolution of Mind) is discussed 50 years later by the great scientist Stephen Hawking as cited below.

 ( II ) From reference below: Stephen Hawking on Learning and Evolution

 REF:

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/07/stephen-hawking-the-planet-has-entered-a-new-phase-of-evolution.html (Interested readers may refer to the entire article dated July 3, 2009. The relevent excerpts are reproduced below).

As hawking says:

“But what distinguishes us from our cave man ancestors is the knowledge that we have accumulated over the last ten thousand years, and particularly, Hawking points out, over the last three hundred”.

We are now entering a new phase, of what Hawking calls "self designed evolution," in which we will be able to change and improve our DNA. Hawking observes, our human brains "with which we process this information have evolved only on the Darwinian time scale, of hundreds of thousands of years. This is beginning to cause problems.

In the 18th century, there was said to be a man who had read every book written. But nowadays, if you read one book a day, it would take you about 15,000 years to read through the books in a national Library. By which time, many more books would have been written."

I am sure that during the next century, people will discover how to modify both intelligence, and instincts like aggression.

If the human race manages to redesign itself, to reduce or eliminate the risk of self-destruction, we will probably reach out to the stars and colonize other planets.

Comments:

Please note that Hawking is emphasizing on the 'motive' of human behavior. And motive emerges from nothing else than “mind”.

Vijay R. Joshi.

Darwinism: Importance and Limitations ( E O M - 3)

Charles Darwin established his theory of evolution in 1859. Ever since he established his theory, he impacted the world and our perspective of evolution. Yet, in the 1930′s through the 1950′s the modern evolutionary synthesis developed and redefined Darwin’s theory. But, now scientist are believing that its to abrupt or too “quick,” therefore they began to focus on the paradigm shift.

In “Darwin Still Rules, but Some Biologists Dream of a Paradigm Shift” by Douglas H. Erwin, (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/26/science/26essay.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0), he gives us a further explanation of how evolutionary biologist tend to revise the Charles Darwin theory and expand it towards the paradigm shift.

Paradigm shift is when a significant change occurs. For instance, from one fundamental view to another different point of view. Yet, before the paradigm shift, the modern evolutionary synthesis was introduced first.

The modern evolutionary synthesis; defines evolution as the change over time in this genetic variation and takes into account all branches of biology. According to Douglas, he stated that the modern evolutionary synthesis was created because many biologist disagreed with the Darwinism and therefore they made a new concept which was the modern evolutionary synthesis. Up to this date, it has been constantly used.

The synthesis has been useful, it can hold mutations to DNA, within the species it creates new alternatives of existing genes. As a result it will allow only the best adapted individuals to produce many remaining off-springs. That being the case, this is the primary agent in shaping new adaptations, and Charles Darwin acknowledged that this was a powerful tool.

Philosopher Ron Amundson, claims that the modern synthesis deals with the transmission of gene from one generation to the next.

Also the most recent discoveries in the new field of evolutionary developmental biology, is the gene Pax-6, and its able to control the formation of the eyes in mice and humans.

Another new significant discovery is the Nkx2.5 heart formation and the formation of the nervous system. This contributes with examining the genetic and developmental mechanisms influencing how the form of organisms develop.

In conclusion,

Charles Darwin evolution theory has played a big role for our society, humanity, education and world. Yet, many scientist tend to doubt it or revise it. Therefore, modern evolutionary synthesis became established and up to this date it has been quite useful. But scientist tend to move on with the paradigm shift and be part of it as well. In the article, “Darwin Still Rules, but Some Biologist Dream of Paradigm Shift,” it focuses on how scientist are developing the paradigm shift.

Unfortunately, it will take time until we see new tensions accommodated within an expanded modern synthesis according to Douglas H. Erwin.

(REF. Elizabeth Duque. (http://openlab.citytech.cuny.edu/seto-bio1lc/2012/12/17/darwin-a-paradigm-shift)

Vijay R. Joshi.