Counter Argument for the Evolution problem for Epiphenomenalism
Posted: Thu Mar 28, 2024 11:33 pm
Hello everyone! I joined this forum to get some opinions on arguments I have made, this one is for the Counter Argument for the Evolution problem for Epiphenomenalism: Epiphenomenalism fails because it has no evolutionary advantage and so would not have evolved alongside humans.
My Response: I think this fails because of pleitropic genes. I read a book by Richard Dawkins that addressed this phenomenon: A pleiotropic gene is a single gene that controls more than one trait, and there is much evidence that pleitropic genes exist. An example would be Marfan syndrome, which is caused by a variation in the FBN1 gene. People with Marfan syndrome tend to be tall with long thin fingers, toes and limbs. They are also, however, prone to a wide variety of symptoms, including heart defects and problems with the eyes and spine. The point is that these phenotypes seem to have no obvious relation, but they are highly correlated. My view is that if epiphenomenalism is true, perhaps it is the result of a similar phenomenon: an advantageous trait that we hold could be pleitropically tied to the development of consciousness. Consciousness does not need to have an evolutionary advantage in this case: it is unavoidably developed as a side-effect of the advantageous gene.
Please let me know any comments or feedback you have! Recommendations for further research are also appreciated
!
My Response: I think this fails because of pleitropic genes. I read a book by Richard Dawkins that addressed this phenomenon: A pleiotropic gene is a single gene that controls more than one trait, and there is much evidence that pleitropic genes exist. An example would be Marfan syndrome, which is caused by a variation in the FBN1 gene. People with Marfan syndrome tend to be tall with long thin fingers, toes and limbs. They are also, however, prone to a wide variety of symptoms, including heart defects and problems with the eyes and spine. The point is that these phenotypes seem to have no obvious relation, but they are highly correlated. My view is that if epiphenomenalism is true, perhaps it is the result of a similar phenomenon: an advantageous trait that we hold could be pleitropically tied to the development of consciousness. Consciousness does not need to have an evolutionary advantage in this case: it is unavoidably developed as a side-effect of the advantageous gene.
Please let me know any comments or feedback you have! Recommendations for further research are also appreciated
!