What is the connection between evolution and consciousness? - Chapter 13

The theory of evolution

In the past it was believed that everything in the world was designed by a designer, namely God. The biologist Darwin, however, proposed the theory of evolution. Evolution literally means gradual change. According to Darwin, there were slow changes on the earth and variation among organisms. Different organisms compete for food, water or other resources, this lead to a competition n which the weaker organisms were slowly dying and the organisms that would survive would pass on the information helped them survive to future generations. Their descendance would then have the characteristics that made survival easier. The organisms that are best adapted to the environment are therefore most likely to survive if, for example, food shortages exist. "evolutionary algorithm" refers to the idea that if there is the three-part algorithm variation, inheritance and selection, then there must be evolution. Design out of chaos without help from spirit.

Lamarckism

Lamarck agreed with Darwin that species gradually change into other species, but he stated that there must first be an internal force that directs progress in one direction and that, in addition, the inheritance of acquired characteristics is required. This theory is now called Lamarckism. Lamarck believed that if an animal wants to change itself, then the effect of this is passed on to the next generation. For example, if a giraffe always stretches its neck to get to the highest branches, then the next generation of giraffes would have a longer necks.

Although there are many similarities between the visions of Darwin and Lamarck, there are also differences. Lamarck believed that evolution always means progress, while Darwin does not assume this. Darwin also does not believe that there is an internal force that causes this progress. Lamarck's theory was more popular in the beginning than Darwin's, since the church had fewer problems with his theory.

Lamarck's theory, however, appears to be incorrect. If, for example, you are predisposed to obesity, but have been slim for years because of your diet, this does not prevent your future children from having a predisposition to obesity. Genetic information is therefore not influenced by external changes that have arisen after birth (but genes are turned on or off by behavior / environment).

Darwin's theory failed to explain the principle of heredity. Mendel was the first to describe heredity, which is known under the Laws of Mendel. He researched how genetic variation arises and is passed on by sexual means. He was of the opinion that adaptive design based on the rearrangement and mutation of genes is sufficient. Within this idea there are discussions between prominent people (including Dennett and Darwin among others) about the allocation and responsibility of different genetic processes. When Mendel's theory was accepted, for the first time there was an explanation for the mechanism of heredity, which led to neo-Darwinism. This means that all variation between generations and species can be explained by recombination and mutation of genes.

The goal of evolution

What is evolution good for? What are the benefits of evolution? People often think that organisms evolve because they want to increase the chance of survival of their species (in a group). Darwinism is often misunderstood as the mechanism that creates adaptations for the good of species. However, this is not entirely true. 

Dawkins came in 1976 with the ' selfish gene theory' . The ultimate goal of natural selection is not the kind, not the group, not the individual, but the gene. Genes are egoistic ('selfish') in the sense that they want to be passed on. It is not that they have their own intentions or desires, but they want to copy their information, as it were, by passing on themselves. It is not smart to think that every human trait is good for the adaptation to the environment.

Thinking that every human trait is adaptive is also called panadaptionism . Panadaptionism states that many properties are not adaptations and are not optimal for the organism, but are still transmitted. Possibly they had previously been optimal for the organism. Another possibility is that some traits are influenced by coincidences and physical limitations.

Human evolution

Social biologists state that most human traits are adjustments to the environment, on the other hand, evolutionary psychologists list two reasons why this is not the case. First, they state that human traits that used to serve as a means of adaptation no longer have a value. For example, in the past, sugar and fat had an advantageous value for hunters and collectors, but nowadays many people suffer more and more from obesity because of their predilection for sugar and fat. A second reason is that evolutionary psychologists distinguish between:

1. replication strategies of genes 
2. human strategies to seek pleasure and success.

We want to eat well and we long for sex, because people who ate well in the past and had sex, were more likely to pass on their genes.

Consciousness and evolution

The question that goes with the statement that consciousness has evolved is: does consciousness have a function? Chapter 3 already explains that it is difficult to say what the function of consciousness is. However, it is also difficult to believe that consciousness has no added value. For example, intelligence and memory are not developed without a sense of consciousness. How come? Why is there still consciousness? So why did not intelligence and memory develop separately from consciousness? These questions are somewhat like the question of what pain experience has for added value over the physical processes that cause pain.

Zombie evolution

Flanagan states that consciousness is not necessarily needed. Evolutionary processes would have ensured that intelligence bodies like us exist and this intelligence would not have to go hand in hand with consciousness. This vision is called ' conscious inessentialism' . According to this theory, zombies are possible.

Functionalist, however, believe that zombies are not possible, since consciousness can not be distinguished from adaptative traits. This view states that consciousness has no adaptative function.

Summary of consciousness and evolution

In summary, it can be stated that there are four visions on the relationship between consciousness and evolution:

1. Epiphenomenalism: consciousness- essentialism According to this approach, the idea of ‘zombies’ is theoretically possible. They can be that look like us, but lack of consciousness. The awareness is separate adaptive features such as intelligence, language, and problem solving, but it does not make any distinctive difference (definition of a zombie) and it has no evolutionary effects (this epiphenomenalism). The most important question is: does evolution produce consciousness instead of zombies? .
2. The consciousness has an adaptive function: From this approach, zombies are not possible, because having a consciousness marks the difference. It can be separated from acquired adaptive such as intelligence, memory, language and problem solving and adds something new. The most important question is: 'what is the function of consciousness?’ or 'what does consciousness do?'
3. The consciousness has no independent function: Again, zombies are not possible, because every animal presents similar characteristics as those of what we would call consious. The consciousness is not an acquired characteristic that presents an evolutionary purpose such as intelligence, memory or language. From this point of view, the most important question is: 'why is consciousness a necessary characteristic that should be passed among generations in beings like us? '
4. Consciousness is an illusion. Our ideas about consciousness are very confusing, most of what we know is pure speculation and has almost no empirical evidence. The most important question here is: 'why do beings like us become so concerned with the idea of our own consciousness? '.

Resources:Blackmore; Susan. (2010). Consciousness, Second Edition An Introduction. Abingdon, Oxon: Taylor & Francis.