What do you think?
Rate this book
Energy and the Evolution of Life
"Energy and the Evolution of Life" provides an interdisciplinary approach to the question of life's origin. The text includes clear coverage of biochemical and mathematical topics. The author develops a novel approach to two fundamental problems in evolutionary How did self-reproducing molecules arise from inert matter? How and why have living organisms become progressively more complex through evolution? His thesis is that "biological organization and evolution are a consequence of the flow of energy through matter."
182 pages, Hardcover
Published January 1, 1988
2 people are currently reading
8 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
August 27, 2016
The book starts with promise. It’s about how cosmic energy transforms itself into matter and then how non-life matter evolves into life, characterized initially by self-assembling molecules that in time evolved into macromolecules with self-regulation and memory storage capacities.*
The text is technical, filled with mathematical formulas, chemical diagrams and numerical charts. All of this leads to Fox’s thesis that adjustments based on feedback and learned behaviors stored in memory provided the capacity for more sophisticated and quicker interactions than strict, genetic-based behavior for “non-linear events” and this, Fox says, enabled an organism “to anticipate the outcome of movements before they actually occur.”
Humans have the most evolved form of this capacity and, Fox writes, “with a brain, a new kind of life has emerged, multi-individual organisms.” This is the meme-like phenomenon and Fox argues that it is this information and knowledge sharing capacity that enables us to supersede Darwinian theory. On this point, he states that “different groups of humans with virtually identical genetic heritages have engaged in numerous battles for selection which are determined by culture, not by genetic mutation. Special weapons and organization skills have been determinant factors in these struggles for supremacy.”
Does Fox take liberties with Darwinian theory? Learning-knowledge differences lead to advantages for supremacy in various forms, but I don’t understand how his theory transcends Darwin’s as even those who are on the lower end of the supremacy scale still have babies and continue with reproduction (and with genetic variability, a good number of these offspring can become quite good at the “supremacy” battle).** It strikes me that Fox also conflates evolutionary ends (survival and well-being of the body as the reproduction vehicle) and the evolutionary means (instinctive and learning mechanisms, including self-regulation and memory) that make these ends achievable. Darwinian ends are not transcended, but the means by which they are achieved do vary, by species and by individuals within a species.
Though his descriptions are difficult to follow, the value of Fox’s book is his emphasis on “energy flow.” As I read him, we make too much of a distinction between energy (typically viewed, simply, as “gas” to run our vehicles) and structure (matter that forms bodies and brains). In short, the energy of life inherently (the way chemicals combine) contains structure (a self-organization and function) capacity.
*Fox refers to these life forms as the “self-begetting manifestation of uroboros.” He says that chemical evolution of life began about 3 billion years ago (with the “iron catastrophe” when the iron-group metal elements sank to the earth’s core). He then asks the reader to “carry a feeling for geological time” to appreciate the time it took for life to evolve.
** Interestingly, Fox does not mention that this capacity to learn, to vary responses based on feedback and learning, evolved because of the survival advantages such capacities provided. Counter to Fox, this intelligence capacity most likely supplements, not replaces, instinctual behaviors. This is a point suggested by Joseph LeDoux who argues that in the case of fear-based reactions, it is instinct that actually gives us the quicker response, before the conscious brain kicks in. When the brain engages, it provides the information and context that enables a more sophisticated response.
The text is technical, filled with mathematical formulas, chemical diagrams and numerical charts. All of this leads to Fox’s thesis that adjustments based on feedback and learned behaviors stored in memory provided the capacity for more sophisticated and quicker interactions than strict, genetic-based behavior for “non-linear events” and this, Fox says, enabled an organism “to anticipate the outcome of movements before they actually occur.”
Humans have the most evolved form of this capacity and, Fox writes, “with a brain, a new kind of life has emerged, multi-individual organisms.” This is the meme-like phenomenon and Fox argues that it is this information and knowledge sharing capacity that enables us to supersede Darwinian theory. On this point, he states that “different groups of humans with virtually identical genetic heritages have engaged in numerous battles for selection which are determined by culture, not by genetic mutation. Special weapons and organization skills have been determinant factors in these struggles for supremacy.”
Does Fox take liberties with Darwinian theory? Learning-knowledge differences lead to advantages for supremacy in various forms, but I don’t understand how his theory transcends Darwin’s as even those who are on the lower end of the supremacy scale still have babies and continue with reproduction (and with genetic variability, a good number of these offspring can become quite good at the “supremacy” battle).** It strikes me that Fox also conflates evolutionary ends (survival and well-being of the body as the reproduction vehicle) and the evolutionary means (instinctive and learning mechanisms, including self-regulation and memory) that make these ends achievable. Darwinian ends are not transcended, but the means by which they are achieved do vary, by species and by individuals within a species.
Though his descriptions are difficult to follow, the value of Fox’s book is his emphasis on “energy flow.” As I read him, we make too much of a distinction between energy (typically viewed, simply, as “gas” to run our vehicles) and structure (matter that forms bodies and brains). In short, the energy of life inherently (the way chemicals combine) contains structure (a self-organization and function) capacity.
*Fox refers to these life forms as the “self-begetting manifestation of uroboros.” He says that chemical evolution of life began about 3 billion years ago (with the “iron catastrophe” when the iron-group metal elements sank to the earth’s core). He then asks the reader to “carry a feeling for geological time” to appreciate the time it took for life to evolve.
** Interestingly, Fox does not mention that this capacity to learn, to vary responses based on feedback and learning, evolved because of the survival advantages such capacities provided. Counter to Fox, this intelligence capacity most likely supplements, not replaces, instinctual behaviors. This is a point suggested by Joseph LeDoux who argues that in the case of fear-based reactions, it is instinct that actually gives us the quicker response, before the conscious brain kicks in. When the brain engages, it provides the information and context that enables a more sophisticated response.
Displaying 1 of 1 review