Could it be that the "curiosity" feature is the force that makes the creatures evolve? (in the absence of actual changes in the climatic conditions, that is)
2007-03-16 02:17:50 · 10 answers · asked by Trillian, Moon Daisy 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I mean the biological changes, in animals too, not just the technological development of the human race.
2007-03-16 02:19:30 · update #1
I mean curiosity as the thing that pushes some individual to go exploring different territories (like, go out of the sea), then forces his system to adapt, then causes genetic changes in his offspring etc.
2007-03-16 02:22:42 · update #2
I think you have an excellent point (though I think wrong section actually :). It always seems to me that in populations of animals (including humans) there is a certain percentage of very curious, exploring, and also "misbehaving", "dissenting" individuals. Call them scouts, mad scientists, lunatics, whatever, and most of these individuals will experience failure and misery in their life, but some (few) will discover new land, new ideas, new ways to improve their chances, and even sometimes improve the whole population.
2007-03-16 02:29:36 · answer #1 · answered by NaturalBornKieler 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Curiosity could explain changes in environment, but only for a few species. For instance, I can see a **** Erectus traveling far distances out of curiosity, but I can't see an earthworm, which doesn't have a true brain, being curious. (An example of human-like animals' migration is suggested in the Out-of-Africa Theory.)
I'd also like to point out a problem with something you said: You said that being in a new environment can cause genetic changes in animals. But things don't work that way. The mutations in the DNA are random. The environment just dictates which mutations are helpful or harmful to an organism.
What you said sounded more like Lamarckian evolution than Darwinian evolution.
2007-03-16 02:50:13 · answer #2 · answered by x 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Many aspects of exploration (which is a form of curiosity) are shared among all beings, as all known terrestrial beings share similar aspects: limited size and a need to seek out food sources.
hmm, but does it drive evolution? I would say evolution (or rather natural selection) has favored species that exhibited curiosity to a degree (too much will probably end in a tiger's maw).
2007-03-16 03:40:10 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wow!!
Thats philosophical. Curiosity?? What do you mean??
Well, I'd have to say NO!!!! Curiosity does not drive changes that mantain themselves through time in a certain population, and THATS evolution. I don't know where you got this idea but I don't think I grasp it.
Natural selection and genetic drift cause evolution WITH OR WITHOUT enviromental changes.
2007-03-16 02:25:39 · answer #4 · answered by Emiliano M. 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most humans lack curiousity. Many never move far from their birthplace or do anything lasting. They never seek, never create, invent or look beyond their day to day.
The technology we have today is built on the backs of those who went before. Most of us have no idea how it really works.
If curiousity were a driver of evolution, we'd be extinct.
2007-03-16 02:57:18 · answer #5 · answered by awayforabit 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's more appropriate to look at "curiosity" as an adaptive trait. There's always outside selection pressure
2007-03-16 02:20:41 · answer #6 · answered by hot carl sagan: ninja for hire 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
And what evidence would you provide to support this conjecture? I don't believe that curiosity in any way influences biological evolution although of course it plays a part in social evolution.
2007-03-16 02:31:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
One of many things. Too much can be detrimental, especially in the genus felis.
2007-03-18 05:40:08 · answer #8 · answered by novangelis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Genes and natural sekection
2007-03-16 02:20:24 · answer #9 · answered by rostov 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes indeed.
2007-03-16 02:20:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋