Edelš«
Alex WildāWhat is the function of Species X?ā Is a question I hear often from non-biologists.
But itās hard to answer. Species donāt exist to serve a function. They exist because they can. Everything is just trying to find a way to be.
apophis@alexwild what is the function of Species H. s.?
AdeptVeritatisNiches need to be filled.The "entropy of evolution" takes care of it.
Matilda's Lab@AdeptVeritatis @alexwild The entropy of evolution. I love this phrase. It's so concise yet says so much. I'm definitely stealing it, just as an FYI ššš
There is a reason, we can not just let climate change run through and let humankind be eradicated with the goal of evolution taking over afterwards, which would give back power to nature.
It is a problem with entropy.
(And as long as we don't understand the Cambrian explosion, we should not play around with it.)
Nelson@alexwild This reminds me of the time someone asked Tony Hawk if he was Tony Hawk, and when he said yes, they asked him, "Why?"
Andrew Benedict-Nelson@alexwild Hear hear. I'm reading a book by an evolutionary psychologist right now -- it's actually pretty good -- but it really frustrates me how we basically equates natural selection with a kind of intentional design. Dude, a lot of this stuff just happens to be here.
I also really like this book as a corrective to overly reductionist views: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/224257/the-evolution-of-beauty-by-richard-o-prum/
The Evolution of Beauty by Richard O. Prum: 9780345804570 | PenguinRandomHouse.com: Books
A major reimagining of how evolutionary forces work, revealing how mating preferencesāwhat Darwin termed "the taste for the beautiful"ācreate the extraordinary range of ornament in the animal...
@alexwild Also "Everything is just trying to find a way to be" may be my new bumper sticker.
your auntifa liza šµš· š¦ š¦¦@alexwild this is the most profound wisdom to come from a scientist. if we apply this to our species, then :
humans exist not to serve a function but because we can. we should then find a way to continue being.
Dilman Dila
Scott MatterItās a tricky oneā¦ āfunctionā can have some pretty heavy overtones of āpurposeā, which is not helpful.
What are some better words you prefer?
Richard Miller@alexwild this is extremely relatable.
Barry Schwartz š«@alexwild Really the answer is that there is no such thing in nature as a species. If I asked you to point at a species, you would have to point at a dictionary or a tree diagram or such!
In nature, there are only the individual organisms,who may resemble each other, but who all are unique!
(Natural selection stated in terms only of things in nature: children closely resemble parents; but children also are unique individuals; different individuals produce different numbers of issue.)
MrCopilot@alexwild all life has one function:
Survival
Court Cantrell does not comply@alexwild But...but TICKS. š«
Barry Goldman@alexwild yeah but... if god...
BeyondMachines 
@alexwild
That question doesn't deserve an answer. We humans are broken.
Most human cultures now are seeing the rest of the environment as tools/benefits/resources beholden to the need of humanity - hence the question.
jirsch
Martin Rundkvist
clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy šøšŖšš°šš@mrundkvist @alexwild I think the question behind the question āWhat is the function of Species X?ā is "Can we just incinerate them all without any negative consequences to us?"
CharlieBell@alexwild Every species is part of a network, a link in a chain of life. Breaking the chain affects many other species, often including us.
Jencel Panic@alexwild Ask them what's the function of humans
SeiĆ°r@alexwild I'll be fucked if that's not peak capitalist brain-rot.
Good fucking gods. I am so fucking tired as a Biologist and as a personā¦
Summer Lane@alexwild same function as anything else they eat, shit, and have sex
Nudeln Al Dente š@alexwild I thought everything was just trying to find a way to be a crab? š
Maxilo OveritSpeciation as job application. Go.
rsp@aka_quant_noir @alexwild While species do not exist to serve a function, they do in fact serve functions. Question: is there a word similar to function that would be more appropriate? Humans serve the function of providing a niche for follicle mites and human lice and hundreds of kinds of bacteria, viruses, ect. I wouldn't say that species have a "purpose* in the sense of fulfilling a supreme being's plan--but in the sense that other species depend on other species.
@rspfau @aka_quant_noir I like to think of ecological gravity in a multi-dimensional space, where a particular organism affects the trajectory of other organisms. That's not their purpose, but it's their result, and if it's stable enough over time then other things adjust to it.
@alexwild @aka_quant_noir So the *result* of a species' existence is to be a component of other species' niches. In the same way that evolution has no purpose but it has a result.
Photo Ewen š·A friend of mine was lamenting today that there's not enough conversation on Mastodon, then this thread turns up!
You're welcome at my place for a chat over a cup of tea and a biscuit anytime.
skua@rspfau @aka_quant_noir @alexwild
The perception of function seems dependent on both the worldview of, and interpretation by, the observer.
The perception of function seems dependent on both the worldview of, and interpretation by, the observer.
neville park@rspfau @aka_quant_noir @alexwild finally, someone looking out for the follicle mites
(it's hard to study them in the lab because they can't live long off our skin. a recent paper suggests they are evolving to become even more dependent upon us https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/39/6/msac125/6604544 )
John S. Wilkins@alexwild I agree about species but would put it differently. Organisms try to find a way to be mainly because of past natural selection: some of them didn't try to be, but (probably) had few descendants as a result. Also "try" suggests cognition, or metaphorically, function, which again is probably the result of past natural selection. A phrase as pithy and evocative as yours is difficult! "There are more things that had higher chances of finding a way to be" does not have the same ring to it.
sugarsh0t@alexwild in all my courses dealing with ecology, I never really heard āfunctionā but rather āroleā, which I like (and feels more malleableāthe same role can be fulfilled by different species depending on environment, and a particular speciesā role may differ depending on how the question is framed).
llewelly@alexwild
it seems to me that for most charismatic megafauna, there is a "traditional answer"; lions exist to "control" the zebra population, cheetah exist to "control" the gazelle population, wolves "control" the deer population, and so on.
it seems to me that for most charismatic megafauna, there is a "traditional answer"; lions exist to "control" the zebra population, cheetah exist to "control" the gazelle population, wolves "control" the deer population, and so on.
pericat@alexwild perhaps a better question might be, "What are its relationships?" Both within and without.
Ehud