What do you think?
Rate this book
Life's Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe
Life's Solution builds a persuasive case for the predictability of evolutionary outcomes. The case rests on a remarkable compilation of examples of convergent evolution, in which two or more lineages have independently evolved similar structures and functions. The examples range from the aerodynamics of hovering moths and hummingbirds to the use of silk by spiders and some insects to capture prey. Going against the grain of Darwinian orthodoxy, this book is a must read for anyone grappling with the meaning of evolution and our place in the Universe. Simon Conway Morris is the Ad Hominen Professor in the Earth Science Department at the University of Cambridge and a Fellow of St. John's College and the Royal Society. His research focuses on the study of constraints on evolution, and the historical processes that lead to the emergence of complexity, especially with respect to the construction of the major animal body parts in the Cambrian explosion. Previous books include The Crucible of Creation (Getty Center for Education in the Arts, 1999) and co-author of Solnhofen (Cambridge, 1990). Hb ISBN (2003) 0-521-82704-3
488 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
21 people are currently reading
665 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 - 25 of 25 reviews
April 28, 2013
From my lay reader, non-scientist perspective, the basic theme of the book is that there is a huge universe of biological space for evolution to act within. However, there are many constraints on what paths or spaces are viable, and since life began it has adapted to following those constrained paths which still are incredibly diverse. And because these various constraints exists various forms of life have adapted in similar ways, converging on similar solutions to life's challenges, whether that be seeing, swimming, flying, farming, or even just breathing.
Most of the book is devoted to heaping one example of convergence on another. My only complaint, and the reason I gave it three stars instead of four, is that the author made no attempt to define or dispose of the technical jargon of the various scientific fields involved. Clearly, he was not targeting the general audience, but rather trying to influence the members of his own community. Nevertheless, I did manage to learn a lot about convergence and I share some sympathy for his theory that if life has or were to evolve on other planets that it would face the same types of constraints as found on Earth and that therefore, alien life might not be all that different from life here.
He makes a bit of a hard right turn in the last two chapters of the book when he expresses the philosophy that all of this may open up a bridge between science and religion, that somehow the constraints on evolution as evidenced by the many convergences may point to some kind of Creation, and the inevitability of sentient beings, although he takes pains at many points in the book to disavow 'creation scientists' and any person or group that denies the fact of evolution. I cannot say that he is wrong anymore than he can say he is right, but I will say that his arguments did little to sway me in his direction. Still, and again, I found it useful overall, and will be of interest to anyone interested in the debates between the author and Stephen J. Gould and the ultra-Darwinists.
Most of the book is devoted to heaping one example of convergence on another. My only complaint, and the reason I gave it three stars instead of four, is that the author made no attempt to define or dispose of the technical jargon of the various scientific fields involved. Clearly, he was not targeting the general audience, but rather trying to influence the members of his own community. Nevertheless, I did manage to learn a lot about convergence and I share some sympathy for his theory that if life has or were to evolve on other planets that it would face the same types of constraints as found on Earth and that therefore, alien life might not be all that different from life here.
He makes a bit of a hard right turn in the last two chapters of the book when he expresses the philosophy that all of this may open up a bridge between science and religion, that somehow the constraints on evolution as evidenced by the many convergences may point to some kind of Creation, and the inevitability of sentient beings, although he takes pains at many points in the book to disavow 'creation scientists' and any person or group that denies the fact of evolution. I cannot say that he is wrong anymore than he can say he is right, but I will say that his arguments did little to sway me in his direction. Still, and again, I found it useful overall, and will be of interest to anyone interested in the debates between the author and Stephen J. Gould and the ultra-Darwinists.
August 9, 2019
Very readable but a bit meandering, so it requires some concentration to follow. Ultimately I really appreciate the effort to respectfully and thoughtfully push back against unsupported excesses of hyper-darwinism of the type often associated with Dawkins. I appreciated the erudite but understated tone used to do so and think it does the author-- and thinking Christians generally-- credit.
In soecifica, while I support the premise, I felt the arguments suggesting a universal genetic code and perhaps universal protein families was somewhat weak. I think the author underestimates the varieties of functional proteins possible. He fails to consider to what extent happenstance in the early development of life may have locked all earth life into a relatively small box of possible protein space, thus giving a false impression that others are not viable just because there is no viable transition pathway from here to there. I find the suggestions about convergence in macroscopic structures and ecological niches much more persuasive and easier to imagine.
In soecifica, while I support the premise, I felt the arguments suggesting a universal genetic code and perhaps universal protein families was somewhat weak. I think the author underestimates the varieties of functional proteins possible. He fails to consider to what extent happenstance in the early development of life may have locked all earth life into a relatively small box of possible protein space, thus giving a false impression that others are not viable just because there is no viable transition pathway from here to there. I find the suggestions about convergence in macroscopic structures and ecological niches much more persuasive and easier to imagine.
July 16, 2016
One of the most learned and insightful books of biology I've ever read. A delight on almost every page. Erudite, endearing, fresh, and ambitious.
January 28, 2022
Simony Conway Morris argues that the evolution of humans was an inevitability, not a happenstance. He does so by showing that evolution keeps giving organisms from divergent lines the same solutions to similar problems, and therefore evolution is more constrained than previously thought.
About a decade ago, SCM changed my relationship with evolution from "grudgingly accept" to "embrace." I bought and started this book, only to find it hard to read. I generally have difficulty sustaining my attention on long tracts written by British people, for some reason.
So instead, I bought and read "The Deep Structure of Biology," a volume he edited that contained talks given by different biologists and some theologians at the Vatican about convergent evolution.
Yet, I kept referring to this book when arguing with people online. Turns out, he develops his argument better in this volume. Not only does he offer a dauntingly more number of examples, his examples are coherent in establishing the requisites for human intelligence, such as bipedalism, vision, etc. He also addresses attacks on his thesis.
For example, his detractors like to point out that human intelligence was a one-off, something that didn't evolve anywhere else. SCM rebuts by pointing out in this book that dolphins have bigger brains than our closest relatives (chimps, gorillas, orangutans). Dolphins developed big brains to deal with the ice age just as hominids did to deal with extreme aridity in Africa.
Another person I encountered try to say that because a big brain is metabolically expensive, it's very difficult for organisms to acquire them. In Life's Solution, he pointed out the example of an eel whose brain uses three times the proportion of all its oxygen than human brains do.
Nonetheless, "The Deep Structure of Biology" has contributions from the original researchers that SCM cited in this book, making it a good complement to this one.
Interestingly, although Richard Dawkins agrees with him on the inevitability of human intelligence, their reasoning are entire opposites with regards to the relationship between abiogenesis and evolution. Dawkins believed that since we can only have so much luck to get here, and the beginning of life was very difficult, human evolution had to be near-inevitable or else we'd run out of luck. In contrast, SCM argues that both abiogenesis and evolution are remarkable because there are almost an infinite number of directions possible with evolution, yet we keep getting the same results over and over.
Today, engineers and computer scientists are using algorithms based on biological evolution to design antennas and other sophisticated gadgets. If we take SCM's conclusion that human evolution was inevitable, and add the existence of evolutionary algorithms, we get a strong sense that we're supposed to be here.
Additionally, just learning about the grandeur of this biosphere from this book makes me appreciate the creator even more.
Soli Deo gloria!
About a decade ago, SCM changed my relationship with evolution from "grudgingly accept" to "embrace." I bought and started this book, only to find it hard to read. I generally have difficulty sustaining my attention on long tracts written by British people, for some reason.
So instead, I bought and read "The Deep Structure of Biology," a volume he edited that contained talks given by different biologists and some theologians at the Vatican about convergent evolution.
Yet, I kept referring to this book when arguing with people online. Turns out, he develops his argument better in this volume. Not only does he offer a dauntingly more number of examples, his examples are coherent in establishing the requisites for human intelligence, such as bipedalism, vision, etc. He also addresses attacks on his thesis.
For example, his detractors like to point out that human intelligence was a one-off, something that didn't evolve anywhere else. SCM rebuts by pointing out in this book that dolphins have bigger brains than our closest relatives (chimps, gorillas, orangutans). Dolphins developed big brains to deal with the ice age just as hominids did to deal with extreme aridity in Africa.
Another person I encountered try to say that because a big brain is metabolically expensive, it's very difficult for organisms to acquire them. In Life's Solution, he pointed out the example of an eel whose brain uses three times the proportion of all its oxygen than human brains do.
Nonetheless, "The Deep Structure of Biology" has contributions from the original researchers that SCM cited in this book, making it a good complement to this one.
Interestingly, although Richard Dawkins agrees with him on the inevitability of human intelligence, their reasoning are entire opposites with regards to the relationship between abiogenesis and evolution. Dawkins believed that since we can only have so much luck to get here, and the beginning of life was very difficult, human evolution had to be near-inevitable or else we'd run out of luck. In contrast, SCM argues that both abiogenesis and evolution are remarkable because there are almost an infinite number of directions possible with evolution, yet we keep getting the same results over and over.
Today, engineers and computer scientists are using algorithms based on biological evolution to design antennas and other sophisticated gadgets. If we take SCM's conclusion that human evolution was inevitable, and add the existence of evolutionary algorithms, we get a strong sense that we're supposed to be here.
Additionally, just learning about the grandeur of this biosphere from this book makes me appreciate the creator even more.
Soli Deo gloria!
January 29, 2009
This thing is incredibly dense with evidence and examples, but I can't help getting past this guy's abiding interest in demonstrating that faith is somehow self-evident in the array of evolutionary convergence. Morris makes some pretty strident suggestions about how life would or will or could evolve elsewhere in the universe, though, with absolutely no evidence at hand. It's a hefty wager for a thinker to make, and I don't think I can defend it as speculative science when it's so clearly intended to apologize for his own abiding Christian faith. Even so, his wit takes the dullness out of some deep archeological and biological concepts, and for that I am grateful. It took me two months to read this, simply because it's so full. Not a sentence is wasted on filler, save for the occasional rhetorical gesture or snarky riposte.
January 23, 2025
I read this for a paper a few months ago. I was very impressed by how technical it is - it very convincingly lays out the idea of convergent evolution (not quite the random thing we always associate with the topic). The theological argument at the end is a sort of parable and aporetic - I don’t know how convincing I find it. However, I wonder if this idea of convergence/a focus on evolution tending to forms/morphological space is the way forward if one wants to return to the idea of metaphysical biology - that certain kinds of things or ways of being are both natural and good for creatures, including humans. I also wonder what its implications are for natural theology.
October 20, 2022
This book is not for the lay reader without a sufficient interest in evolution or some background in reading about evolution previously. Conway Morris using very technical language at times that most readers will find it difficult to comprehend without a keen interest in the topic.
I myself didn’t understand all of the book, but I do believe I understood the gist. Contrary to folks like Richard Dawkins, evolution is not a random accident with no direction. I’m fact, it’s quite the opposite as Conway Morris shows how evolutionary convergences point to the evolution of something “human” like was inevitable.
This book has pretty much pet the nail in the coffin for me ever holding any kind of physicalist metaphysical worldview. I think idealism, Panpsychism, or theism is more likely to be true after reading this book.
You would be hard pressed to explain why evolution hits on the same solution over and over again in different phylogenetic trees under a physicalist metaphysical worldview. I’m sure it can be done but it’ll just seem like hand waving sophistry.
I myself didn’t understand all of the book, but I do believe I understood the gist. Contrary to folks like Richard Dawkins, evolution is not a random accident with no direction. I’m fact, it’s quite the opposite as Conway Morris shows how evolutionary convergences point to the evolution of something “human” like was inevitable.
This book has pretty much pet the nail in the coffin for me ever holding any kind of physicalist metaphysical worldview. I think idealism, Panpsychism, or theism is more likely to be true after reading this book.
You would be hard pressed to explain why evolution hits on the same solution over and over again in different phylogenetic trees under a physicalist metaphysical worldview. I’m sure it can be done but it’ll just seem like hand waving sophistry.
June 1, 2024
THE EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGIST SUGGESTS THAT THEOLOGY MAY HAVE A PURPOSE…
Author Simon Conway Morris wrote in the Preface to this 2003 book, “The central theme of this book depends on the realities of evolutionary convergence: the recurrent tendency of biological organization to arrive at the same ‘solution’ to a particular ‘need.’… Its main, but not ultimate, aim is to argue that, contrary to received wisdom, the emergence of human intelligence is a near-inevitability. My purpose is not to demonstrate the inevitability of a five-fingered organism… it is … the recurrent emergence of… various biological properties…
“[T]here are four conclusions. First, what we regard as complex is usually inherent in simpler systems: the real … question in evolution is … how it is that things are put together. Second, the number of evolutionary end-points is limited: by no means everything is possible. Third, what is possible has usually been arrived at multiple times, meaning that the emergence of the various biological properties is effectively inevitable. Finally, all this takes time. What was impossible billions of years ago becomes increasingly inevitable: evolution has trajectories (trends, if you prefer) and progress is … simply part of our reality.” (Pg. xii-xiii)
He goes on, “convergence also opens another door. If the emergence of our sentience was effectively inevitable, then perhaps we should take rather more seriously the sentiences of other species? So too perhaps we should stand back and consider what a very odd set-up it is we inhabit, from the eerily efficient genetic code, to the deeply peculiar molecule DNA, to a set of biological organizations that repeatedly throw up complex structures, not least the brain… [Fred Hoyle’s] remark that the Universe was a set-up job rings strangely true… if you happen to be a ‘creation scientist’ … and have read this far, may I politely suggest that you put this book back on the shelf. It will do you no good. Evolution is true, it happens, it is the way the world is, and we too are one of its products.
"This does not mean that evolution does not have metaphysical implications; I remain convinced that this is the case. To deny, however, the reality of evolution and … to distort deliberately the scientific evidence in support of fundamentalist tenets is inadmissible. Contrary to popular belief, the science of evolution does not belittle us. As I argue, something like ourselves is an evolutionary inevitability, and our existence also reaffirms our one-ness with the rest of Creation. Nevertheless, the free will we are given allows us to make a choice. Of course, it might all be a glorious accident; but alternatively perhaps now is the time to take some of the implications of evolution and the world in which we find ourselves a little more seriously.” (Pg. xv-xvi)
He states, “to anticipate the main theme of this book---let us accept that the genetic code must be spectacularly efficient, driven to a one-in-a-hundred-million alternatives by the remorseless action of selection. All life shares this one code, but this commonality has not stifled the creative potentials of life, as both the fossil record and the exuberance of the living world so clearly demonstrate. Yet for all this exuberance and flair there are constraints: convergence is inevitable, yet paradoxically the net result is… a patent trend of increased complexity.” (Pg. 21)
He points out, “Earlier I remarked on the gleeful abasement of humans, not least to inform us that we are insignificant worms in the cosmic drama… Suppose, at least for the sake of the argument… that the earth is genuinely a cosmic accident… [Evolutionary] orthodoxy states that evolution can potentially explore a million different trajectories. Even if somewhere there is a planet like Earth, so the argument continues, there may well be life but assuredly no biped writing lines similar to these… I shall try to persuade you to take another view.” (Pg. 105)
He observes, “the principal topic is … the attempt to establish the likelihood of the repeated emergence of complex biological systems.” (Pg. 201) Later, he adds, “many of the evolutionary features that help to define the human are convergent. If such features as warm-bloodedness, vocalization, and even agriculture can evolve independently, then so, took on any suitable planet the same will emerge. Yet at this stage there is surely a dimension missing… we still seem to be far removed from anything specifically human with such hallmarks as bipedality, tool-making, culture, and intelligence...” (Pg. 228)
He suggests, “Suppose that there are advanced extraterrestrials: will they be like us, at least vaguely humanoid, or so alien as to defy belief and perhaps even recognition, let alone communication?... not only are there good arguments that aliens would see and smell using very similar proteins to those we use, but their electrical conductivity would again converge towards the same solution.” (Pg. 229, 231)
He notes, “So are we, as humanoids, in some sense either very probable, or perhaps even inevitable?... it now seems increasingly likely that whatever alternatives there might be they are going to be highly restricted. How many avenues are available even for the origin of life? Given our lack of success in this area…could there be only one?....[DNA] might be a molecule uniquely suitable for biological processes. Even the strange optimization of the genetic code indicates that although there must be alternatives, they are not going to be abundant. If life is universal, it also seems likely that it has a universal basis… life may well be a universal principle, but that does not prevent our being alone.” (Pg. 233-234)
He argues, “what we know of evolution suggests … convergence is ubiquitous and the constraints of life make the emergence of the various biological properties very probable, if not inevitable. Arguments that the equivalent of Homo sapiens cannot appear on some distant planet miss the point: what is at issue is not the precise pathway by which we evolved, but the various and successive likelihoods of the evolutionary steps that culminated in out humanness.” (Pg. 283-284)
He clarifies, “It might be claimed that convergence is too elusive a concept to have any real validity: what after all does ‘similar’ really mean in a biological context?... My overall approach … is to see in the recurrent emergence of biological properties such as intelligence, memory, and self-recognition… a program that is more interested in the definition and probability of complex states than the precise history that led to any particular example.” (Pg. 300-301)
He states, “the number of potential ‘blind alleys’ is so enormous that in principle all the time since the beginning of the Universe would be insufficient to find the one in a trillion-trillion solutions that actually work…. The stock response is to invoke a million monkeys typing alternatives, with the invisible hand nudging the myriad of efforts toward the correct Shakespearean sonnet… This really misses the point, first because it presupposes that the correct version is known all along, and secondly because it fails to tackle the problem of the almost illimitable size of biological ‘hyperspaces.’… It is my suspicion that … [there may be] a deeper fabric to biology in which Darwinian evolution remains central as the agency, but the nodes of occupation are effectively determined from the Big Bang. One such node is, of course, that of the humanoid, and from the present evolutionary perspective we are undeniably unique. Yet… if we had not arrived at sentience and called ourselves human, then probably sooner rather than later some other group would have done so, perhaps from within the primates, perhaps from further afield, even much further afield… it is now supposed that with our origins revealed this must banish any religious instinct: what was almost universally believed is now to be seen as an immense delusion. Now is the time, it is proclaimed, to adopt wholeheartedly the naturalistic view of life… we shall see that things are not necessarily so simple.” (Pg. 309-310)
He asserts, “the pronouncements of the ultra-Darwinists can shake with a religious fervor. Richard Dawkins is arguably England’s most pious atheist… Notwithstanding the quasi-religious enthusiasms of ultra-Darwinists, their own understanding of theology is a combination of ignorance and derision… It seldom seems to strike the ultra-Darwinists that theology might have its own richness and subtleties, and might… actually tell us things about the world that are not only to our real advantage, but will never be revealed by science.” (Pg. 315-316) Later, he adds, “Despite these antagonisms, however, there are also attempts to find common ground between sciences and religions, most notably in the field of cosmology… Yet despite this, strange to say, biology and especially genetics have their own fundamentalisms.” (Pg. 322)
He summarizes, “The idea of a universe suitable for us is, of course, encapsulated in various anthropic principles… they all remind us that the physical world has many properties necessary for the emergence of life… Not only is the Universe strangely fit to purpose, but so… is life’s ability to navigate to its solutions… at the heart of the study of evolution are two things. One… is the uncanny ability of evolution to navigate to the appropriate solution through immense ‘hyperspaces’ of biological possibility. The other… is the attempt to explain the origins of sentience… [and] our strange sense of purpose… [So] given that evolution has produced sentient species with a sense of purpose, it is reasonable to take the claims of theology seriously… the discussion… is more than worth the effort. In my opinion it will be our lifeline.” (Pg. 327-328)
He concludes, “the complexity and beauty of ‘Life’s Solution’ can never cease to astound. None of it presupposes, let alone proves, the existence of God, but all is congruent. For some it will remain as the pointless activity of the Blind Watchmaker, but others may prefer to remove their dark glasses. The choice, of course, is yours.” (Pg. 330)
This book will be “must reading” for those interested in contemporary evolutionary theory, Intelligent Design, and similar issues.
Author Simon Conway Morris wrote in the Preface to this 2003 book, “The central theme of this book depends on the realities of evolutionary convergence: the recurrent tendency of biological organization to arrive at the same ‘solution’ to a particular ‘need.’… Its main, but not ultimate, aim is to argue that, contrary to received wisdom, the emergence of human intelligence is a near-inevitability. My purpose is not to demonstrate the inevitability of a five-fingered organism… it is … the recurrent emergence of… various biological properties…
“[T]here are four conclusions. First, what we regard as complex is usually inherent in simpler systems: the real … question in evolution is … how it is that things are put together. Second, the number of evolutionary end-points is limited: by no means everything is possible. Third, what is possible has usually been arrived at multiple times, meaning that the emergence of the various biological properties is effectively inevitable. Finally, all this takes time. What was impossible billions of years ago becomes increasingly inevitable: evolution has trajectories (trends, if you prefer) and progress is … simply part of our reality.” (Pg. xii-xiii)
He goes on, “convergence also opens another door. If the emergence of our sentience was effectively inevitable, then perhaps we should take rather more seriously the sentiences of other species? So too perhaps we should stand back and consider what a very odd set-up it is we inhabit, from the eerily efficient genetic code, to the deeply peculiar molecule DNA, to a set of biological organizations that repeatedly throw up complex structures, not least the brain… [Fred Hoyle’s] remark that the Universe was a set-up job rings strangely true… if you happen to be a ‘creation scientist’ … and have read this far, may I politely suggest that you put this book back on the shelf. It will do you no good. Evolution is true, it happens, it is the way the world is, and we too are one of its products.
"This does not mean that evolution does not have metaphysical implications; I remain convinced that this is the case. To deny, however, the reality of evolution and … to distort deliberately the scientific evidence in support of fundamentalist tenets is inadmissible. Contrary to popular belief, the science of evolution does not belittle us. As I argue, something like ourselves is an evolutionary inevitability, and our existence also reaffirms our one-ness with the rest of Creation. Nevertheless, the free will we are given allows us to make a choice. Of course, it might all be a glorious accident; but alternatively perhaps now is the time to take some of the implications of evolution and the world in which we find ourselves a little more seriously.” (Pg. xv-xvi)
He states, “to anticipate the main theme of this book---let us accept that the genetic code must be spectacularly efficient, driven to a one-in-a-hundred-million alternatives by the remorseless action of selection. All life shares this one code, but this commonality has not stifled the creative potentials of life, as both the fossil record and the exuberance of the living world so clearly demonstrate. Yet for all this exuberance and flair there are constraints: convergence is inevitable, yet paradoxically the net result is… a patent trend of increased complexity.” (Pg. 21)
He points out, “Earlier I remarked on the gleeful abasement of humans, not least to inform us that we are insignificant worms in the cosmic drama… Suppose, at least for the sake of the argument… that the earth is genuinely a cosmic accident… [Evolutionary] orthodoxy states that evolution can potentially explore a million different trajectories. Even if somewhere there is a planet like Earth, so the argument continues, there may well be life but assuredly no biped writing lines similar to these… I shall try to persuade you to take another view.” (Pg. 105)
He observes, “the principal topic is … the attempt to establish the likelihood of the repeated emergence of complex biological systems.” (Pg. 201) Later, he adds, “many of the evolutionary features that help to define the human are convergent. If such features as warm-bloodedness, vocalization, and even agriculture can evolve independently, then so, took on any suitable planet the same will emerge. Yet at this stage there is surely a dimension missing… we still seem to be far removed from anything specifically human with such hallmarks as bipedality, tool-making, culture, and intelligence...” (Pg. 228)
He suggests, “Suppose that there are advanced extraterrestrials: will they be like us, at least vaguely humanoid, or so alien as to defy belief and perhaps even recognition, let alone communication?... not only are there good arguments that aliens would see and smell using very similar proteins to those we use, but their electrical conductivity would again converge towards the same solution.” (Pg. 229, 231)
He notes, “So are we, as humanoids, in some sense either very probable, or perhaps even inevitable?... it now seems increasingly likely that whatever alternatives there might be they are going to be highly restricted. How many avenues are available even for the origin of life? Given our lack of success in this area…could there be only one?....[DNA] might be a molecule uniquely suitable for biological processes. Even the strange optimization of the genetic code indicates that although there must be alternatives, they are not going to be abundant. If life is universal, it also seems likely that it has a universal basis… life may well be a universal principle, but that does not prevent our being alone.” (Pg. 233-234)
He argues, “what we know of evolution suggests … convergence is ubiquitous and the constraints of life make the emergence of the various biological properties very probable, if not inevitable. Arguments that the equivalent of Homo sapiens cannot appear on some distant planet miss the point: what is at issue is not the precise pathway by which we evolved, but the various and successive likelihoods of the evolutionary steps that culminated in out humanness.” (Pg. 283-284)
He clarifies, “It might be claimed that convergence is too elusive a concept to have any real validity: what after all does ‘similar’ really mean in a biological context?... My overall approach … is to see in the recurrent emergence of biological properties such as intelligence, memory, and self-recognition… a program that is more interested in the definition and probability of complex states than the precise history that led to any particular example.” (Pg. 300-301)
He states, “the number of potential ‘blind alleys’ is so enormous that in principle all the time since the beginning of the Universe would be insufficient to find the one in a trillion-trillion solutions that actually work…. The stock response is to invoke a million monkeys typing alternatives, with the invisible hand nudging the myriad of efforts toward the correct Shakespearean sonnet… This really misses the point, first because it presupposes that the correct version is known all along, and secondly because it fails to tackle the problem of the almost illimitable size of biological ‘hyperspaces.’… It is my suspicion that … [there may be] a deeper fabric to biology in which Darwinian evolution remains central as the agency, but the nodes of occupation are effectively determined from the Big Bang. One such node is, of course, that of the humanoid, and from the present evolutionary perspective we are undeniably unique. Yet… if we had not arrived at sentience and called ourselves human, then probably sooner rather than later some other group would have done so, perhaps from within the primates, perhaps from further afield, even much further afield… it is now supposed that with our origins revealed this must banish any religious instinct: what was almost universally believed is now to be seen as an immense delusion. Now is the time, it is proclaimed, to adopt wholeheartedly the naturalistic view of life… we shall see that things are not necessarily so simple.” (Pg. 309-310)
He asserts, “the pronouncements of the ultra-Darwinists can shake with a religious fervor. Richard Dawkins is arguably England’s most pious atheist… Notwithstanding the quasi-religious enthusiasms of ultra-Darwinists, their own understanding of theology is a combination of ignorance and derision… It seldom seems to strike the ultra-Darwinists that theology might have its own richness and subtleties, and might… actually tell us things about the world that are not only to our real advantage, but will never be revealed by science.” (Pg. 315-316) Later, he adds, “Despite these antagonisms, however, there are also attempts to find common ground between sciences and religions, most notably in the field of cosmology… Yet despite this, strange to say, biology and especially genetics have their own fundamentalisms.” (Pg. 322)
He summarizes, “The idea of a universe suitable for us is, of course, encapsulated in various anthropic principles… they all remind us that the physical world has many properties necessary for the emergence of life… Not only is the Universe strangely fit to purpose, but so… is life’s ability to navigate to its solutions… at the heart of the study of evolution are two things. One… is the uncanny ability of evolution to navigate to the appropriate solution through immense ‘hyperspaces’ of biological possibility. The other… is the attempt to explain the origins of sentience… [and] our strange sense of purpose… [So] given that evolution has produced sentient species with a sense of purpose, it is reasonable to take the claims of theology seriously… the discussion… is more than worth the effort. In my opinion it will be our lifeline.” (Pg. 327-328)
He concludes, “the complexity and beauty of ‘Life’s Solution’ can never cease to astound. None of it presupposes, let alone proves, the existence of God, but all is congruent. For some it will remain as the pointless activity of the Blind Watchmaker, but others may prefer to remove their dark glasses. The choice, of course, is yours.” (Pg. 330)
This book will be “must reading” for those interested in contemporary evolutionary theory, Intelligent Design, and similar issues.
Want to read
April 20, 2021Toomas Paul:
Cambridge’i ülikooli evolutsioonilise paleobioloogia professor Simon Conway Morris on oma raamatus inimese paratamatusest Maal jõudnud järeldusele, et maise looduse evolutsioon on konvergentne: hoolimata bioloogilisest mitmekesisusest jäävad väga erinevate taime- ja loomataksonite evolutsioonis kestma sarnaste funktsioonidega organid, sarnased tunnused. Lõppkokkuvõttes tähendab see, et hoolimata väljasuremistest ja muudest katkestustest ning näiliselt tohutust hulgast võimalustest juhuslikus valikus viib evolutsioon vältimatult aistimisvõimeliste loomadeni ning lõpuks teadvusega inimeseni. „Teiste sõnadega, evolutsioon ei ole nii juhuslik protsess, nagu darvinism seda näidata püüab. Inimene võib teatud mõttes tõesti olla selle protsessi eesmärk või sihtpunkt … ja olla ainuke mõistusega olend Universumis. Ent kui kuskil mujal peaks siiski leiduma sobivaid tingimusi, kulgeks evolutsioon ikkagi enam-vähem sama rada nagu Maal ja viiks samasuguse inimeseni“ (lk 320).
Teadus, püüeldes küll absoluutse objektiivsuse poole, on ikkagi inimeste konstruktsioon ega pea andma lõplikke vastuseid. Conway Morris maalib kujundlikult silme ette pildi kartmatult teaduse kõrgeimate mäetippude poole rühkivatest teadlastest, kes kohale jõudes leiavad sealt eest teoloogid, juba nautimas imepäraseid vaateid.
On meeldiv mõelda, et astronoomid liituvad nüüd teoloogide seltskonnaga. Paraku pean nukrusega nentima, et need, kes ei ole pidanud pingutama, ei oska alati hinnata hunnitut vaadet, mis kõrgusest avaneb …
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry romaani „Tsitadell“ beduiinipealik sedastab: „Ja kui sellel, kes on suutnud üles ronida, läheb korda käte jõul ja põlvede abil ületada kaljutipp, siis ei saa sa väita, et tema rõõm oleks niisamasugune kui paikse inimese keskpärane rõõm, kes ühel puhkepäeval on oma lõdva ihu vedanud laugja künka lamedale laele ja kõhutab seal rohu peal.“
https://www.sirp.ee/s1-artiklid/c9-so...
Cambridge’i ülikooli evolutsioonilise paleobioloogia professor Simon Conway Morris on oma raamatus inimese paratamatusest Maal jõudnud järeldusele, et maise looduse evolutsioon on konvergentne: hoolimata bioloogilisest mitmekesisusest jäävad väga erinevate taime- ja loomataksonite evolutsioonis kestma sarnaste funktsioonidega organid, sarnased tunnused. Lõppkokkuvõttes tähendab see, et hoolimata väljasuremistest ja muudest katkestustest ning näiliselt tohutust hulgast võimalustest juhuslikus valikus viib evolutsioon vältimatult aistimisvõimeliste loomadeni ning lõpuks teadvusega inimeseni. „Teiste sõnadega, evolutsioon ei ole nii juhuslik protsess, nagu darvinism seda näidata püüab. Inimene võib teatud mõttes tõesti olla selle protsessi eesmärk või sihtpunkt … ja olla ainuke mõistusega olend Universumis. Ent kui kuskil mujal peaks siiski leiduma sobivaid tingimusi, kulgeks evolutsioon ikkagi enam-vähem sama rada nagu Maal ja viiks samasuguse inimeseni“ (lk 320).
Teadus, püüeldes küll absoluutse objektiivsuse poole, on ikkagi inimeste konstruktsioon ega pea andma lõplikke vastuseid. Conway Morris maalib kujundlikult silme ette pildi kartmatult teaduse kõrgeimate mäetippude poole rühkivatest teadlastest, kes kohale jõudes leiavad sealt eest teoloogid, juba nautimas imepäraseid vaateid.
On meeldiv mõelda, et astronoomid liituvad nüüd teoloogide seltskonnaga. Paraku pean nukrusega nentima, et need, kes ei ole pidanud pingutama, ei oska alati hinnata hunnitut vaadet, mis kõrgusest avaneb …
Antoine de Saint-Exupéry romaani „Tsitadell“ beduiinipealik sedastab: „Ja kui sellel, kes on suutnud üles ronida, läheb korda käte jõul ja põlvede abil ületada kaljutipp, siis ei saa sa väita, et tema rõõm oleks niisamasugune kui paikse inimese keskpärane rõõm, kes ühel puhkepäeval on oma lõdva ihu vedanud laugja künka lamedale laele ja kõhutab seal rohu peal.“
https://www.sirp.ee/s1-artiklid/c9-so...
September 30, 2019
The big "idea" here is that biologists can study, define and narrow the solution space in which life arises, and so we can use that knowledge to make tentative guesses at the possibility of life elsewhere in the universe...but that life is unlikely elsewhere so we should have religious feeling.
The specific argument is that because useful evolutionary features arise in multiple species, this means that extraterrestrials are constrained to a similar degree of traits. The word is "convergence" - we all converge on a similar set of traits.
But then the book veers weirdly into post-Catholic apologia, arguing that the life on earth is extremely lucky and rare so we are probably alone in the universe and because that is a Wonder™️ we must therefore Religion™️. And the author follows Darwin's strategy of anticipating criticism in his text by mislabelling critics of his religious sentiments as nihilists.
Look, it's beautiful and brilliant. The footnotes are great. The text and book production is luminously post-modern. But it was written in 2003 and argues for a kind of neo-Darwinian religiosity and it just seems it is either A. nonsense or B. true in a mediocre way or C. both.
The book's probably been outdated in the last decade by new discoveries, but that is beyond my layperson balliwick.
The specific argument is that because useful evolutionary features arise in multiple species, this means that extraterrestrials are constrained to a similar degree of traits. The word is "convergence" - we all converge on a similar set of traits.
But then the book veers weirdly into post-Catholic apologia, arguing that the life on earth is extremely lucky and rare so we are probably alone in the universe and because that is a Wonder™️ we must therefore Religion™️. And the author follows Darwin's strategy of anticipating criticism in his text by mislabelling critics of his religious sentiments as nihilists.
Look, it's beautiful and brilliant. The footnotes are great. The text and book production is luminously post-modern. But it was written in 2003 and argues for a kind of neo-Darwinian religiosity and it just seems it is either A. nonsense or B. true in a mediocre way or C. both.
The book's probably been outdated in the last decade by new discoveries, but that is beyond my layperson balliwick.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 21, 2023
A really great survey of stellar, geologic, and (primarily) biological facts, all of which are highly restrictive in their paths that lead to 'success'. The stellar and geologic facts certainly point to a very specific set of requirements and hurdles to navigate in just the right way at just the right time to end up where we are. And the biology focuses in great depth on the difference between the many "possible" path that life might take vs the ones that actually are successful and fecund.
He wraps up by asserting that the simplicity of life's solutions and the surprising ways in which they defy scientific assumptions about how things "should" work lend some credence to a faithful interpretation of our origins. He also points out that this need not convince anyone. What I like most is that he leaves the interpretation up to the individual, but suggests that the current, diametrically opposed views, need not be at odds with one another.
I understand why many find faith unconvincing. And yet, in light of the many examples brought forward in this book, I believe that it takes just as much faith to think that it all happened without external intervention.
4* only because that's my "really good" rating; I reserve 5* for books that knock my socks off.
He wraps up by asserting that the simplicity of life's solutions and the surprising ways in which they defy scientific assumptions about how things "should" work lend some credence to a faithful interpretation of our origins. He also points out that this need not convince anyone. What I like most is that he leaves the interpretation up to the individual, but suggests that the current, diametrically opposed views, need not be at odds with one another.
I understand why many find faith unconvincing. And yet, in light of the many examples brought forward in this book, I believe that it takes just as much faith to think that it all happened without external intervention.
4* only because that's my "really good" rating; I reserve 5* for books that knock my socks off.
June 30, 2020
Hard to read for a non-biologist, so it took me 6 months to finish it. It was worth the effort nevertheless.
Spoiler:
Evolution is convergent AND sparse. It is convergent, because the instances of the same properties / features / organs / mechanisms evolve independently from one another whenever the environment in which the organism lives requires it. Sparse, because despite the large number of possibilities in the hyperspace of permutations of all possible molecules, structures, organisms, etc, only few of the possible combinations are in fact optimal, or even viable, be it on a molecular level or organ level.
Any alien we meet, would likely be of a humanoid form with features very similar to our own, including the molecules that make up the genetic code and the form and function of the body parts.
Spoiler:
Evolution is convergent AND sparse. It is convergent, because the instances of the same properties / features / organs / mechanisms evolve independently from one another whenever the environment in which the organism lives requires it. Sparse, because despite the large number of possibilities in the hyperspace of permutations of all possible molecules, structures, organisms, etc, only few of the possible combinations are in fact optimal, or even viable, be it on a molecular level or organ level.
Any alien we meet, would likely be of a humanoid form with features very similar to our own, including the molecules that make up the genetic code and the form and function of the body parts.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 14, 2018
Dense, but filled with a lot of information on convergence. Worth reading for anyone interested in the subject. My only complaint is that the author comes out swinging and takes potshots at various positions, leading me to feel that I might need another book to balance this one.
June 6, 2022
Conway Morris’ overview of convergent evolution was spectacular, but his conclusions were disappointing. I could see where he was coming from, certainly; however, he made statements that I didn’t think he could adequately support with the evidence he provided.
January 24, 2011
This book argues for the provocative thesis that the course of biological evolution, and indeed the course of cosmological evolution, is in a direction of unmistakable progress culminating with human society. We indeed may be the only intelligent civilization in the Milky Way, or even in the entire universe, but that does not detract from the fact that the eventual emergence of intelligent beings like ourselves (quite possibly even including our overall biochemistry and physical form) was inevitable. In this thesis, Conway Morris (his surname) takes a sharply different view of nature than, say, Stephen J. Gould and numerous other scientists who fail to see any discernible "progress".
Conway Morris's best exposition is the many examples he cites of "convergence," namely the fact that numerous different lines of evolution ultimately have resulted in similar overall structures. One obvious example is the eye, which has evolved from earlier light-sensitive structures in numerous different evolutionary lines.
The author finally argues (pg. 326-330) that this view of nature may lead to a "recovery" from the painful and destructive conflict between science and religion. "None of [this material] presupposes, let alone proves, the existence of God, but all is congruent. For some it will remain as the pointless activity of the Blind Watchmaker, but others may prefer to remove their dark glasses. The choice, of course, is yours."
Conway Morris's best exposition is the many examples he cites of "convergence," namely the fact that numerous different lines of evolution ultimately have resulted in similar overall structures. One obvious example is the eye, which has evolved from earlier light-sensitive structures in numerous different evolutionary lines.
The author finally argues (pg. 326-330) that this view of nature may lead to a "recovery" from the painful and destructive conflict between science and religion. "None of [this material] presupposes, let alone proves, the existence of God, but all is congruent. For some it will remain as the pointless activity of the Blind Watchmaker, but others may prefer to remove their dark glasses. The choice, of course, is yours."
April 3, 2016
I got this book as counterpoint to Rare Earth, thinking that this author thinks complex life is common in the universe. Wrong! He doesn't address it much, but he pretty much agrees that it is rare. What he does say is that there aren't many ways to accomplish biological adaptations - to make an eye, it's got to be either a camera or compound, and to be really good it's got to be a camera. to carry oxygen in blood you need hemoglobin, and to use light you need chlorophyll. Many life forms have reinvented the same solutions over and over. So if you have complex life, you are in time going to get something that looks and acts very very much like a human. At the end of the book, he wraps up by saying that the fine-tuning of the universe that makes life possible, and the uncanny way that life navigates the immense landscape of possibilities to find solutions that work, says to him that there is meaning and there is a creator. He argues against the strong atheism of moderns such as Dawkins and 19th-c. writers such as Haeckel (who bought into the ideology that became Nazism). Me, I have some problems with the book. Sure, there are lots of convergences in evolution, but couldn't vertebrates have ended up with 6 legs instead of 4? Couldn't technology have been found by rodents rather than primates? I'm not convinced. And I think the multiverse concept, esp. the strong version suggested by Tegmark, is a better explanation for cosmic coincidences.
February 1, 2012
Quite a fascinating book about evolution. Mostly about convergence, the consistent tendency of life to find the same solution through various pathways, as for example the camera eye, which has evolved independently multiple times in various creatures. Conway Morris' point is that life does not have infinite and random possibilities; evolution is highly constrained by the viable possibilities of its environment. Thus there is a direction to evolution, and sentient creatures very like us are an inevitable result. If we ever find alien life, we will probably find creatures recognizably like ourselves. On the other hand, there is a good chance we are alone; and we may never know.
Conway Morris' concern is to build a picture of the universe that is not necessarily pointless and directionless, but actually potentially congruent with a theistic way of thinking.
He uses quite a bit of G.K. Chesterton and some C.S. Lewis and Tolkien along the way. With his little flights of imagination and wit fitted into a book that is mostly very technical descriptions of biological and biochemical phenomena, Conway Morris is a most eccentric but very interesting writer.
Conway Morris' concern is to build a picture of the universe that is not necessarily pointless and directionless, but actually potentially congruent with a theistic way of thinking.
He uses quite a bit of G.K. Chesterton and some C.S. Lewis and Tolkien along the way. With his little flights of imagination and wit fitted into a book that is mostly very technical descriptions of biological and biochemical phenomena, Conway Morris is a most eccentric but very interesting writer.
January 17, 2011
This is a poorly written book on a fascinating topic. However, the author convinced me that the traditional Darwinian camp, represented by Dawkins, is reductive and inadequate, and that the gene isn't the fundamental agent of evolution. The theological ideas towards the end of the book are unconvincing though. I hope that scientists continue to pursue these ideas of convergent evolution because it has important implications for understanding "the meaning of life," but it's obvious that this area of study is in a very primitive stage. I hope to find some better-written and more engaging books on this topic.
April 29, 2013
Fascinating tour of biodiversity and evolution, from one of the most prominent palaeontologists in the world. A core idea is the ubiquity of convergence, where similar structures and behaviours evolve numerous times in separate lineages, in response to similar pressures from the environment. A simple example is the body shape of sharks and dolphins, but Conway Morris goes into a huge variety of diverse convergences in things like brain function, vision and social organization.
June 15, 2016
Intriguing look at evolutionary convergence. Touches on topics ranging from abiogenesis and biochemistry to cosmology and theology. Highly critical of Gould's view of evolution as a contingent process; instead looking to convergence for evidence of inevitability (or at least high probability) for certain adaptations.
Want to read
July 13, 2007i think this book is examining the question : Is intelligent life an inevitable consequence of natural selection??
July 29, 2014
A revelation, or a series of revelations, with some truly unexpected conclusions.
February 14, 2010
its not so easy to read, very scientific at some points, but still, the large picture is very interesting. although you will get it completely in the first and last to chapters.
Read
February 27, 2010I read this a while ago and very sadly didn't write anything down!
February 22, 2016
Très bon livre sur la convergence évolutive écrit par un des plus important paléo-biologiste aujourd'hui.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews