Frozen Evolution. Or, that’s not the way it is, Mr. Darwin. A Farewell to Selfish Gene.

In contrast to scientists concerned with the humanitarian disciplines, natural scientists are usually very careful not to use the words “in order to”, especially in written works. They  emphasize again and again that, in nature, all phenomena have causes, but need not necessarily have a purpose. This could be the result of a carry-over from the time of the conflict between arising materialistic sciences and the previously predominant religious view of the world. At the present time, this approach is an anachronism. The tendency to avoid the words “in order to” mostly reduces communication comprehensibility and frequently even correctness. In answer to the question of “Why does a giraffe have a long neck?” it is, of course, possible to reply: Because, amongst the members of the population of short-necked ancestors of the modern giraffe, random mutations occurred that, amongst other things, affected the neck length in a varied manner. Individuals that had a longer neck than the other members of the population as a consequence of a certain mutation could reach to higher branches and thus obtained more food and could multiply more rapidly than their competitors. Thus, the proportion of long-necked individuals in the population gradually increased. In the population of these slightly-long-necked individuals, random mutations again occurred, some of which led to lengthening of the neck, etc. However, when we originally asked why a giraffe has a long neck, we did not want to obtain a general explication of the mechanisms of biological evolution, but were interested only in the specific aspect of long necks in giraffes. We would apparently be satisfied with the answer that a giraffe has a long neck in order to reach the branches of the tree whose leaves it eats. (In actual fact, this classical explanation of the evolution of long necks in giraffes is probably wrong; at the present time, it tends to be more accepted that long necks developed in giraffes through sexual selection (Simmons & Scheepers 1996)).

Avoidance of the words “in order to” mostly not only reduces comprehensibility and may even decrease substantive correctness. If I state that a mullen is yellow because it contains a certain yellow pigment, this is truly an unsuitable simplification and avoids the basic nature of the particular problem. It can be expected with substantial certainty that, even if a particular mullen were to lose its ability to synthesize its yellow pigment through some sort of mutation, it would sooner or later probably acquire the ability to synthesize a different yellow pigment as a consequence of the effect of the existing selection pressures. However, if the selections pressures in the surroundings were to change radically, for example, if pollinators preferring yellow colour were to disappear and pollinators preferring another colour were to remain in the environment, sooner or later it would most probably stop synthesizing yellow pigment.

Basically, it is possible to say that, in living nature, the mechanisms through which a certain property is implemented are not interesting, but rather the purpose which the given property, structure or pattern is to serve is of interest.