Contents - Konrad Lorenz Institute

Fredric J. Heeren
Notes
1 Biological dictionaries now frequently replace the subphylum
name Vertebrata by the newer, broader phylum
name Craniata in order “to represent the distinguishing
characteristics more accurately” (RUDIN 1997). Chief
among craniate distinctions is a manifest head containing
a brain and sensory organs. Modern craniates are also
characterized, as vertebrates were, by a segmented vertebral
column. The group continues to include fish, amphibians,
reptiles, birds, and mammals. In modern
cladograms, the Chordata clade includes the Craniata
clade, the Craniata clade includes the Vertebrata and Myxinoidea
clades, etc.
2 The following distinction is made here between cognition
and intelligence: Cognition is used to describe the application
of mental processes involved in knowledge; while
intelligence describes the ability to know, regardless of its
use. Cognition is the act of using of one’s intelligence. Thus
the human capacity for thought and reason called intelligence
results in human-level cognition, an awareness involving
reasoning and judgment apparently unlike the
mental processes of any other animal on this planet. Human-level
cognition should be detectable, since it tends
to find expression in human-level communication, engineering
feats, abstract and mathematical problem-solving,
musical compositions, fine art, literature, science, etc.
3 That is, the evolution of human-level cognition is dependent
upon a long series of unpredictable, historical events,
making its occurrence on Earth a rarity. If other planets
harbor life, only a very tiny fraction, if any, would then
be expected to host human-level-or-higher cognition.
4 One might argue for a fourth option: that human-level cognition
exists as both a rare fluke and a common or lawlike
property of the universe; but the statements can both be
true only by rendering them meaningless. While there is
nothing logically contradictory about chance mutations
(flukes) and natural selection (law) working together to produce
novel forms of life, the question here is whether it is
rare or common for any such combination of law and
chance to produce forms that result in human-level cognition.
When referring to the evolution of cognition, the first
two hypotheses are contradictory and do not allow for both
as a primary cause.
5 The terms body plan and Bauplan are generally used interchangeably.
James VALENTINE applies the term Bauplan to
“the upper levels of the taxonomic hierarchy” where “phyla-
or class-level clades are characterized by their possession
of particular assemblages of homologous architectural and
structural features” (VALENTINE 1986). Wallace ARTHUR
identifies six morphological characters to distinguish animal
body plans: skeleton, symmetry, pairs of appendages,
body cavity, cleavage pattern, and segmentation (ARTHUR
1997, p27). Like others, ARTHUR tends to identify animal
body plans in the Cambrian period with the animal phyla
(he speaks of the Cambrian “origin of the 35 or so animal
body plans” (ARTHUR 1997, opening page), though in more
general contexts (non-Cambrian) he speaks of “phylum/
class level body plans” (ARTHUR 1997, p27).
6 Developmentalism: emphasizes the importance of understanding
ontogeny—the history of, and the genetic processes
involved in, the development of the individual
organism—for understanding evolution.
Neo-DARWINISM: emphasizes natural selection and mutations
as the overwhelming driving forces for understanding
evolution. Also called the Modern Synthesis (since it synthesizes
these two mechanisms).
Formalism: emphasizes internal constraints toward the evolution
of particular body forms.
Functionalism: emphasizes external adaptations as the primary
force behind the production of characters that function
best in particular environments.
Punctuationalism: emphasizes the geologically abrupt origin
and subsequent stasis (“equilibrium”) of most species.
Gradualism: emphasizes the slow and constant accretion of
small changes that eventually add up to larger changes and
separations between organisms.
Top-down theory: emphasizes the evolution of the higher
taxa first, so that the most widely separated groups appear
early, and “the diversification of the phyla occurs before
that of classes, classes before that of orders, orders before
that of families” (ERWIN/VALENTIN/SEPKOWSKI 1987).
Bottom-up theory: emphasizes the evolution of the higher
taxa from the accumulation of lower taxa, creating a phylogenetic
tree of increasing diversity and eventual disparity.
7 Reductionism is a philosophical method of explaining a
complex set of facts by reducing them to a set of smaller,
simpler facts; the whole should be predictable from its
smaller, constituent parts.
8 Constraints may be negative or positive; negatively, they are
restrictions on evolution’s direction; positively, they are
preferred directionality of variation; either internal or external
factors may constrain evolution toward particular
forms. Channels are usually positive, internal, preferred
evolutionary pathways.
9 Convergence is the explanation for shared characters of independently
evolved organisms. In GOULD’s lexicon, the
convergence of characters is based upon common external
adaptations. He carefully distinguishes convergence from
parallelism, which is the independent origin of common
features channeled by internal constraints of homologous
genes or developmental pathways. Other scientists frequently
employ the term convergence to include any case
where the evolution of characters repeats itself, whether
explained by external constraints or internal channeling.
10 Disparity is the word usually used to describe differences
between organisms that involve whole body plans; diversity
is reserved for differences between lower-taxa organisms,
especially at the species level (GOULD 1989, p49).
11 WEINBERG distinguishes between “consciousness itself”, the
self-awareness/feelings experienced by humans, and “correlatives
to consciousness” that may be examined in terms
of brain waves, electrical activity, hormones in the blood,
etc. (WEINBERG 1992, p44).
Evolution and Cognition ❘ 154 ❘ 2003, Vol. 9, No. 2