Reddit mentions of The Deep Structure of Biology: Is Convergence Sufficiently Ubiquitous to Give a Directional Signal?

Hi bendmorris, we could use a good biologist like yourself. :)

> It's a fallacy to think of humans, or animals, or any specific group as "more evolved" than other organisms.

I think you are misreading what I am saying. If evolution converges on certain solutions then as evolution goes on you get these end results as evolution moves forward. You should read Morris' Life's Solution on this.

> There are countless more evolutionary trajectories that have resulted in modern microorganisms

I think you are arguing that somehow there are so many trajectories you should not expect to get humans necessarily. You should read this book written by several great biologists. They disagree with this line of reasoning very strongly. They think convergence shows it is not correct even though it is the standard lore.

Am I so arrogant as to think me a physicist can say the whole biology community is wrong? No, but when several leading biologists do I start to wonder.

But I appreciate your opinion. You should know there are apparently many biologists who see so much convergence in evolution that this lore is being called into question. (In their minds. Read the books for yourself)

> Here's something to ponder that might challenge your human-centric view of the world

I'm not trying to be human centric. It isn't my fault there is a tremendous amount of convergence in evolution and it also isn't my fault if it converges upon many humanlike traits.

But if there was not widespread convergence you would be 100% correct.