How do the authors conceive of the EEA?

Qualified Writers
Rated 4.9/5 based on 2480 reviews

100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written - Tailored to Your Instructions

Environment of evolutionary adaptedness (EEA)

intext citations only! here is the prompt: Theorists often evoke the “environment of evolutionary adaptedness” (EEA) to explain modern human disease. Select one of the arguments provided for you (depression, neonatal jaundice, sudden infant death syndrome, or pregnancy sickness) or find your own example of such an argument in the literature. Briefly outline and critique the argument being made. How do the authors conceive of the EEA? What definition of adaptation are they using (remember Gould & Lewontin, 1979, and Reeve & Sherman, 2001)? Do you find the argument persuasive (i.e., more than just an “adaptive story”)? What kind of evidence is presented (i.e., how was the adaptive hypothesis tested)? What additional data could be collected to further test the hypothesis?
How do the authors conceive of the EEA? In both cases they are against adaptation and there is nothing like adaptation because all definitions forwarded by the evolutionists rely on diverse factors to describe adaptedness of an organism or part of that organism to perform a certain function. They all emphasize that adaptation can only be defined depending on the present alternatives which can be freely chosen from the accurate phenotype existence in the question being addressed. They also say that, the pre-imposed faith in natural selection as the main agent of adaptation which implies that well adapted organisms or organs will be well established in a certain environment. On the other hand, poorly adapted organisms will be faced off by natural selection. These are only but imaginations. Adaptation is a notion that depends on competition among the existing organisms. The definitions put forward do not describe any specific historical process of change in evolution. Both authors conceive that there is no specific definition of adaptation. What definition of adaptation are they using (remember Gould & Lewontin, 1979, and Reeve & Sherman, 2001)? According Reeve & Sherman, adaptation definition is categorized into that involving Evolutionary History and definition without historical attributes. The definition with evolution history is also divided into adaptation and exaptation whereby organism features built by natural selection for their current roles and those features built other things other their current roles. This goes a head and says that a trait originated in an ancestral taxon and its role has persisted in the lineage is regarded an adaptation in the current descendants while the trait whose original role is distinct from its current role is considered exaptation (Gould_Lewontin 1979). The second definition of adaptation comes from the Derived Traits which states that traits are considered to be adaptations if they are all derived from their phylogenetic group and functionally superior to antecedent traits. There is also definition by spread that states that an organism A is adapted to a task T in population P if A becomes prevalent in P because there was selection for A, where the selective advantage of A was due to the fact that helped A perform the task T. In addition Functional design; this states that adaptations are traits structurally designed to help an organism solve a specific problem that is faced with (Gould_Lewontin 1979) Definitions without evolutionary history involvement regard historical definitions of adaptation invalid and not appropriate fro addressing phenotypic existence because one the historical definition refer to the product of the selective process and the process itself. Secondly, the phen...

Price: £99

100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written - Tailored to Your Instructions