Douglas and Ecolog:
I dunno what Buzz would say. (He once told me that something I wrote to him
in an email was not known by [many?] population ecologists, but I'll be
damned if I can remember what I said. Oh, well . . .)
". . . biological evolution generates hierarchical structure."
Upon what evidence doth this fair theory rest? Ah, here we stumble again
upon the same stone (despite Cicero's aphorism), and must again grapple with
what we mean by "hierarchy." Let us consult history:
From: http://www.etymonline.com/
hierarchy (n.)
mid-14c., from O.Fr. ierarchie, from M.L. hierarchia "ranked division of
angels" (in the system of Dionysius the Areopagite), from Gk. hierarkhia
"rule of a high priest," from hierarkhes "high priest, leader of sacred
rites," from ta hiera "the sacred rites" (neuter plural of hieros "sacred;"
see ire) + arkhein "to lead, rule" (see archon). Sense of "ranked
organization of persons or things" first recorded 1610s, initially of
clergy, sense probably influenced by higher. Related: Hierarchal;
hierarchical.
I'd like to find anything in biology resembling this. Dominance?
Certainly--but dominance is a temporary condition, where hierarchies are
cultural inventions, the aim/goal of which is to maintain control through
power forever. Corporations, ironically, now considered individuals, do not
die. It's the LAW, as decreed by the hierarchy. The "lion" stays at the top
of his pride (damn that irony keeps sneaking in!), and challengers to his
authority are smitten by some kind of captive army. Ah, yes. Another
confusion of terms. In Nature, dominance does not (with the singular
exception of Homo sapiens) maintain an hierarchical structure past the
dominance of the biggest or toughest or best bluffer of a lion. Heirarchy,
in its original meaning, is the exclusive domain (again, dammit) of human
culture. Adaptive or maladaptive? If the former, why are all those bearded
prophets (so to speak--probably uncooperative ecologists) standing on the
corners with signs saying that the end of the world is near?
Adapted gets conflated with success. Bad mistak, I think. Hierarchies are
"successful" but brittle. Adaptation is a continuous process of adjustment
to change. That's not hierarchy, and I don't think panarchy fits either,
despite the best intentions of Holling, et al. and others. I would like to
know what Holling would say. And Stan Rowe. Resilience? The opposite of
brittle, no?
Am I certain? Nope. But I'll rest provisionally on the preponderance of the
evidence or whether a statement seems to be more true than untrue until new
evidence or statements come along.
WT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas Shoemaker" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Discussion Panel Topic Suggestions
What would Buzz Holling say? Panarchy theory posits that biological
evolution generates hierarchical structure. This would
infer directionality. And in the conceptual model, destruction is said to
creative, which might infer advancement.This is particularly interesting
when thinking about what Simin Davoudi calls "Evolutionary Resilience",
which occurs when communities and systems have "the room" to respond to
change by allowing them to evolve. She presents this in an Urban Planning
context, but it resonates for me when considering how ecological thinking
might bridge to, and inform, socio-ecological systems.
Finally, I wonder what can be said of a system that has produced "Love"?
Is
this not directional advancement?
Doug Shoemaker
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Neahga Leonard
<[email protected]>wrote:
Eric,
"Communities evolve"? I'd suggest that communities restructure, but
don't
evolve. The relationships between the shifting members of the
communities
could be said to evolve.
The evolution of the relationships (eg. flower shape & hummingbird beak
shape, etc) is driven by evolution of the populations comprising the
communities.
Tom is entirety correct that it is populations, not individual organisms
that evolve, if it were the latter we would be back with view of
evolution
espoused by Lamarck.
--
Neahga Leonard
*There is not just a whole world to explore, there is a whole universe to
explore, perhaps more than one.*
http://writingfornature.wordpress.com/
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Eric North <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tom; could you clarify?
> I would argue that communities evolve. Read anything from the
> Cottonwood
> Ecology group out of Northern Arizona University and Tom Whitam.
>
> Best-Eric
>
> Eric North
> All Things Wild Consulting
>
> P.O. Box 254
>
> Cable, WI 54821
>
> 928.607.3098
>
>
> > Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 11:45:23 +0000
> > From: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Discussion Panel Topic Suggestions
> > To: [email protected]
> >
> > You might want to rephrase your question #3, for it's not organisms
that
> evolve, but populations.
> >
> > Tom Culliney
> >
> > USDA-APHIS, PPQ
> > Center for Plant Health Science and Technology
> > Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory
> > 1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 300
> > Raleigh, NC 27606 U.S.A.
> > (919) 855-7506
> > (919) 855-7595 (Fax)
> > [email protected]
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of jason.strickland
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 11:38 AM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Discussion Panel Topic Suggestions
> >
> > Dear group,
> >
> > I have compiled some of the ideas that were given to me about my
> discussion panel. The response was much lower than I expected so if you
> have any ideas, feel free to share those as well. Thank you to all
> those
> that contributed.
> >
> >
> > 1. Will most organisms be capable of adapting quickly enough to
> respond to climate change/sea level rise to be evolutionarily relevant?
> >
> > 2. What impact will Genetically Modified Organisms have on the
> ecology and evolution of the modified species and other species?
> >
> > 3. Do organisms progress/improve/advance through evolution?
> >
> > 4. Do ecological processes/interactions last long enough to
> > have
> any meaningful impact on the evolutionary trajectory of a species?
> >
> > Please share your thoughts on these topics or suggest others.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Jason Strickland
> > [email protected]
> >
> > From: jason.strickland
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 3:59 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Discussion Panel Topic Suggestions
> >
> > Dear group,
> >
> > I am currently working on forming a discussion panel that will
> > include
> two ecologists and two evolutionary biologists to discuss topics that
> involve merging ecology and evolution. The discussion will be in front
> of
> 150-200 students ranging from undergraduates to post-docs (all in
biology).
> The panel will happen on a Saturday morning so it needs to be an
> exciting
> discussion to hold the audience's interest and cause them to ask
questions.
> >
> > I am looking for topics/questions that the two fields do not
> > completely
> agree on. The goal is to have the panel disagree on topics to allow the
> students to learn and be entertained. If anyone can suggest topics or
> questions that ecologists and evolutionary biologists have different
> viewpoints on, they would be greatly appreciated. I have a few topics
> already, but wanted to ask a larger audience to suggest topics to
determine
> if there are certain topics/questions that come up frequently. Feel
> free
to
> email me directly ([email protected]<mailto:
> [email protected]>) or respond to this post with your
> suggestions.
> >
> > Thank you in advance for your help,
> >
> > Jason Strickland
> > [email protected]<mailto:
[email protected]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA
> solely for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of
> this
> message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may
violate
> the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you
> believe you have received this message in error, please notify the
> sender
> and delete the email immediately.
>
>
--
Douglas A. Shoemaker, MS
Ph.D. Student *| *Nolan A. Toulan School of Urban Studies & Planning
Portland State University
Fellow *| *Ecosystem Services for Urbanizing Regions IGERT
Institute for Sustainable Solutions
Market Center Building *| *Suite 131**
1600 SW 4th Avenue.* | *Portland, OR 97201****
Phone: 704-936-8249 *|* [email protected]
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1427 / Virus Database: 2634/5443 - Release Date: 12/07/12
