Dynamic Determinism

Dynamic Determinism draws from diverse sources such as Mendelian genetics, Dynamic Systems theory (Thelen and Smith, 1996), Newtonian physics, and neuropsychology. It can be likened, however, to a children’s card game with “crazy eights” or wildcards. Intrinsic genetic perturberators interact both with the environment and with congenital or gestational constraints to produce cohorts that are, on balance, phenotypically responsive to environmental demands. Here we find evidence for the”holy trinity” of the natural order: stability, adaptivity, and elasticity. Adaptivity and elasticity can be observed in the blind cavefish. There is evidence that sightless cavefish have heightened lateral line hair cell receptivity with respect to their sighted relatives (Montgomery, et al., 2004). In other words, they can sense prey, predators, and aquatic disturbances better than many sighted fish. This aligns with the evolutionary principles of biological preparedness or environmental adaptation. Nevertheless, we must part company with evolutionary theorists if we are to understand the principles of elasticity that frequently occur within the natural order. As Borowksy (2008) has shown, it is possible to restore sight to blind cave fish by interbreeding various _sightless_ varieties. Such hybrid vigor is a scientifically observable phenomenon that lies outside the domain of Darwinian evolutionary theory. Another example of elasticity can be seen in the cyclical evolution of Darwin’s finches (Levitus, 2010) and the ubiquitous medium-sized pariah dogs which can be found throughout the world. The latter is an example of “Survival of the prototypical” superseding “Survival of the fittest.” Throughout the natural world, genetic mutations must pass the muster of gestational pruning (through spontaneous abortions) and neonatal parental rejection, which are obviously fatal. Other “postzygotic isolating mechanisms” include hybrid inviability, hybrid sterility, (Global Interchange, 2002) and latent inviability. An example of latent inviability can be seen among Shetland sheepdogs that have merle coats. If a merle is crossed with a merle, it can result in pigmentation deprivation which in turn can lead to deafness and blindness in the “double merle” offspring (Wikipedia). This obviously makes the double-merle dog less adaptive. (Perhaps this is the genetic equivalent of rolling three doubles in Monopoly.) Similarly, constrained adaptive elasticity can also be seen in humans who are heterozygous for sickle cells (and thus have heightened resistance to malaria but do not succumb to sickle cell anemia.) Again, the homozygotic progeny are ill-fated and placed at greater risk. In summary, we are witnesses to a balanced and counterbalanced system of perturbations and constraints which contribute to the robust and varied specimens of the natural world. Thus, we are surrounded by flora and fauna formed within the parameters of dynamic determinism. As humans, we, too, are its beneficiaries.

Through the paradigm of Dynamic Determinism we understand that the Creation is fluid and static; random and regulated. Forest fires cleanse forests, hurricanes rejuvenate oceans, cataracts oxygenate rivers, and epigenetic transcriptions keep species vigorous. Even at the quantum level, randomness safeguards the vitality of an ancient universe. Energy is never lost or wasted, but is frequently transformed. Such transformations are the impetus for our existence and the heralds of our mortality. All atoms and events are counterbalanced or complementary, save one: We could never earn the grace shown to us through the sacrifice of God’s own Son. For this audacious act, the matrices of order and ordination have been jilted.

Works Consulted

Borowsky, R. (8 Jan 2008). “Restoring sight in blind cavefish.” _Current Biology_`8(1)_. R23-24.

http://www.cell.com/current-biology/retrieve/pii/S0960982207022622

Global Interchange. (13 Feb 2002). “The process of speciation.” University of Michigan. http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/globalchange1/current/lectures/speciation/speciation.html

Levitus, D. (2 Jan 2010.) Blogofscience. http://blogofscience.blogspot.com/2010_01_01_archive.html

Montgomery, Coombs, & Bakers. (2 Nov., 2004). “The Mechanosensory Lateral Line System of the Hypogean form of Astyanax Fasciatus” _Environmental Biology of Fishes_62(1-3). 87-96. http://www.springerlink.com/content/g43l96115886w0m9/

Thelen, E. & Smith, L.B. (1996). _A Dynamic Systems Approach to the Development of Cognition and Action. _ Bradford Books / MIT Press. http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=6978

Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shetland_Sheepdog

Advertisements

About dynamicbydesign

B.A.Ed, (English, Speech) University of Nebraska, 1993 M.S. (Psychology), University of Nebraska, 1999
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s