Difference between revisions of "Annotation:Text:Adaptation and Viability/Ylf0dpcend"

From DigiVis
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{WissenschaftlicheReferenz2 |field_radiobutton=Theorie }} {{TextAnnotation |AnnotationOf=Text:Adaptation_and_Viability |LastModificationDate=2019-06-18T15:49:29.432Z |LastMod...")
 
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{WissenschaftlicheReferenz2
 
{{WissenschaftlicheReferenz2
|field_radiobutton=Theorie
+
|field_radiobutton=Information
 
}}
 
}}
 
{{TextAnnotation
 
{{TextAnnotation
 
|AnnotationOf=Text:Adaptation_and_Viability
 
|AnnotationOf=Text:Adaptation_and_Viability
|LastModificationDate=2019-06-18T15:49:29.432Z
+
|LastModificationDate=2019-06-18T15:50:38.022Z
 
|LastModificationUser=User:Sarah Oberbichler
 
|LastModificationUser=User:Sarah Oberbichler
|AnnotationMetadata=^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Ylf0dpcend","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ6Ӻ","startOffset":280,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ6Ӻ","endOffset":1359°Ӻ,"quote":"Colin Pittendrigh (1958, p. 397) spoke of “the unhappy accident that Darwin himself used the terms struggle for existence and survival of the fittest as convenient clichés for the process of natural selection which he himself nevertheless saw—at least at times—more clearly as differential reproduction.” The difficulties with the expression “survival of the fittest” are fairly obvious. If we don’t want to define fittest on some idiosyncratic scale—as chauvinists and racists are wont to do—we must define it in one of two ways: either in terms of the capacity to survive, in which case the expression becomes vacuous, or in terms of inclusive fitness, in which case the word “survival” becomes metaphorical, because genes, whatever miracles they may be purported to achieve, cannot be said to have a life of their own which they might preserve, risk, or lose; they live only insofar as they are part of the organization of a living organism. The metaphors of competition, with their inevitable implication of the goal of winning, however, are only one of the conceptual traps.","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery3210107667374223090472":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","order":"mw-content-text","category":"WissenschaftlicheReferenz2","data_creacio":1560865769132°
+
|AnnotationMetadata=^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Ylf0dpcend","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ6Ӻ","startOffset":280,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ6Ӻ","endOffset":1359°Ӻ,"quote":"Colin Pittendrigh (1958, p. 397) spoke of “the unhappy accident that Darwin himself used the terms struggle for existence and survival of the fittest as convenient clichés for the process of natural selection which he himself nevertheless saw—at least at times—more clearly as differential reproduction.” The difficulties with the expression “survival of the fittest” are fairly obvious. If we don’t want to define fittest on some idiosyncratic scale—as chauvinists and racists are wont to do—we must define it in one of two ways: either in terms of the capacity to survive, in which case the expression becomes vacuous, or in terms of inclusive fitness, in which case the word “survival” becomes metaphorical, because genes, whatever miracles they may be purported to achieve, cannot be said to have a life of their own which they might preserve, risk, or lose; they live only insofar as they are part of the organization of a living organism. The metaphors of competition, with their inevitable implication of the goal of winning, however, are only one of the conceptual traps.","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery3210107667374223090472":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","category":"WissenschaftlicheReferenz2","data_creacio":1560865769132°
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 14:50, 18 June 2019

Referenztyp: Information
Annotation of Text:Adaptation_and_Viability
Annotation Comment
Last Modification Date 2019-06-18T15:50:38.022Z
Last Modification User User:Sarah Oberbichler
Annotation Metadata
^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Ylf0dpcend","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ6Ӻ","startOffset":280,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ6Ӻ","endOffset":1359°Ӻ,"quote":"Colin Pittendrigh (1958, p. 397) spoke of “the unhappy accident that Darwin himself used the terms struggle for existence and survival of the fittest as convenient clichés for the process of natural selection which he himself nevertheless saw—at least at times—more clearly as differential reproduction.” The difficulties with the expression “survival of the fittest” are fairly obvious. If we don’t want to define fittest on some idiosyncratic scale—as chauvinists and racists are wont to do—we must define it in one of two ways: either in terms of the capacity to survive, in which case the expression becomes vacuous, or in terms of inclusive fitness, in which case the word “survival” becomes metaphorical, because genes, whatever miracles they may be purported to achieve, cannot be said to have a life of their own which they might preserve, risk, or lose; they live only insofar as they are part of the organization of a living organism. The metaphors of competition, with their inevitable implication of the goal of winning, however, are only one of the conceptual traps.","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery3210107667374223090472":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","category":"WissenschaftlicheReferenz2","data_creacio":1560865769132°