Sentences with phrase «by an organism in»

What is wanted is an appreciation of the infinite variety of vivid values achieved by an organism in its proper environment.

If recent evidence for Lamarckian inheritance (the inheritance of mutations induced by an organism in response to its immediate environment) holds up and is expanded, it would provide a way of showing not only the importance of self - determination and hybrid physical feelings in evolution, but also of how divinely rooted initial aims could be effective.

More than half of all of the oxygen in our atmosphere is generated by organisms in the sea.

Volcanoes contribute less than 0.2 percent of the total methane budget on Earth, and even they may simply be venting methane produced by organisms in the past.

The microbe seems to be able to replace phosphorus with arsenic in some of its basic cellular processes — suggesting the possibility of a biochemistry very different from the one we know, which could be used by organisms in past or present extreme environments on Earth, or even on other planets.

With less mixing, respiration by organisms in the mid-water layers of stratified oceans will produce oxygen - poor waters, so - called oxygen minimum zones (OMZs).

The rest is either consumed by organisms in the nearshore environment or transported to the deep ocean.

Not exact matches

According to the Oxford research, companies that ply in fine arts, originality, negotiation, persuasion, social perceptiveness and assisting or caring for others are in the least danger of being overtaken by Schwarzenegger - like T - 800 cybernetic organisms.

By contrast, genetically modified organisms are ones where scientists have taken a gene for a specific trait that would not be found in that species normally, and spliced it into the genome.

General Mills (GIS), which has already removed genetically modified organisms (GMOs) from its original Cheerios, has cut sugar by 25 % in its Yoplait yogurt.

The WTO decreed in a complaint brought by the U.S., Canada and Argentina that the EU had violated its WTO obligations by creating «undue delays» in the approval of genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

Not sure what you mean by «genetic information», but evolution requires changes in the genes of the next generation of organism, which is exactly what happens with gene duplication, transposition, etc..

If it increases the survival probability of the organism (measured by, well more of them live) then it stays in future generations.

You can argue that the original organism had better eyesight than others of his species and therefore the change increased his ability to survive, but you ignore that the change had to occur in the first place, and if there was a change in the first animal the interconnectedness of the related bodily functions makes it impossible for the chance change — which by the way required the loss of genetic material — to have happened regardless of the amount of time you had.

The evidence is simply overwhelming and of various different types: the fossil record, the genetic code, experimental confirmations, structures in living organisms which are of no current use but once were, faulty «designs» that are explained by «blind evolution» but that no sentient being would create, predictions that are tested based one the hypothesis it has occurred etc..

The fossil record which shows millions of years of stable species, then an explosion of necessarily mutations, all occurring at the precise necessary time required for complex organisms to develop, and ALL escaping fossilization «the sudden appearance of most species in the geologic record and the lack of evidence of substantial gradual change in most species — from their initial appearance until their extinction — has long been noted, including by Charles Darwin who appealed to the imperfection of the record as the favored explanation» — Wikipedia

God created Adam from a handful of dirt and his spouse from a rib; Talking snakes; trees that bear fruit, that imparts knowledge and eternal life; a global flood, that required a pair of each organism on earth, be stuffed onto a boat; people who lived hundreds of years; a man who was swallowed by a fish, only to be spit up 3 days later, unhurt; a tower god was afraid might reach heaven; a woman who is turned into a pillar of salt; talking donkeys; unicorns; satyrs; a leviathan god creates and then does battle with; a zombie messiah, who was actually god incarnate; zombie Saints who left their graves and wandered about the town; belief in a circular, flat earth.

Matter spontaneously self - constructed miraculously to produce the first single - celled organism which by the way had to be complex at the very start in order to sustain itself AND reproduce?

The only answer which is plausible can be given by the biological theory of knowledge: in the same way as our perception carves Out of the whole physical reality only that zone which has practical importance for our organism, only those recollections which are relevant to our present situation are transmitted into our present moment.

Just as the flow of a stream is determined by a specific landscape, so it seems that the growth and development of the proteins follow an «epigenetic landscape» which is extraneous to the physico - chemical forces that energize the growth process.8 And just as the geographical landscape is extraneous to the flow of water by the power of gravitation, so the epigenetic landscape is extraneous to the «flow» of energized matter operating by physico - chemical forces in the organism's epigenesis.

If persons were only intelligent organisms with finite wants, the problem of adjusting demand and supply could in principle be easily settled by rational calculation.

And finally, an important observation is furnished by Bronislaw Malinowski, who describes the transition from ordinary human experience to religious experience and belief as a «breaking point» to which the human organism reacts in spontaneous outbursts, and in which rudimentary modes of behavior and rudimentary beliefs are engendered.15

When we die our bodies do go back to the earth, become ingested by other organisms, and end up back in the food cycle, yes?

Apr. 19, 2013 — An international research team in including Christian Schlötterer and Alistair McGregor of the Vetmeduni Vienna has discovered a completely new mechanism by which evolution can change the appearance of an organism.

It's an expression of the leader's trust in the releasable inner resources of each individual, trust in the group as a potentially helpful organism, and trust in the process by which the people dynamic in individuals and groups is released.

Structures found in nature are too complex to have evolved step - by - step through natural selection [the concept of «irreducible complexity «1]: Natural selection does not require that all structures have the same function or even need to be functional at each step in the development of an organism.

This amounts to the doctrine that an organism is «alive» when in some measure its reactions are inexplicable by any tradition of pure physical inheritance» (PR 159).

It also serves as a warning to us that the tension between organism and atomism, between our appreciation of the physical existence of constituents and of complex bodies, is not likely to be resolved simply by attending more closely to the details in Process and Reality, chapter and verse.

Hence in opposition to Whitehead, at least as he understands him, Leclerc advocates a modified Aristotelianism, according to which the subordinate entities within a physical organism «act on each other reciprocally, and are thus each modified, in some respect, by the relationship, that is, by their acting» (NPE 309).

DNA / RNA and proteins are by far the most important components of a living organism, carrying out virtually every function in a cell.

And so it follows that the opus humanum laboriously and gradually achieved within us by the growth of knowledge and in the face of evil, is something quite other than an act of higher morality: it is a living organism.

They are «dimly conscious» in two senses: (1) as experiences, they do not normally rise to the stature of conscious centers competing for control of the organism, but they have appetitions and aversions in their own right so that it seems appropriate to label them «dimly conscious»; (2) they are perceived only dimly by the members of the regnant society, i.e., the regnant society has these particular occasions as dim, vaguely felt, negative «scars» on the data of what is clearly perceived in full consciousness.

By being able to anticipate these associated events organisms can behave in ways designed to secure a benefit or avoid a harm.

Until the student of origins can produce repeated examples of spontaneous generation (living organisms created entirely from non-living matter) followed by an evolutionary process, his speculations remain in the realm of philosophy and outside the strict standards of modern science.

For example, Michael Polanyi has written that living organisms contain and transmit information, which in principle can not be explained solely by reference to the laws that govern its physical and chemical embodiment.

A decentered Whiteheadian vision suggests a world where larger and larger patterns of meaning and order emerge gradually, fitfully, and unevenly from the churning multiplicity of value centers constituted by the sophisticated occasions regnant in living organisms.

I want to say that the human organism is like the agency in that there is both the unified togetherness of experience enjoyed by the director and fragmentary bits and pieces of structure which may be at odds with, out of tune with, the agency as a whole.

Ivor Leclerc (3) has recently shown that although Whitehead has - done more than other atomists in explaining the kind of unity possessed by compounds and organisms, he still fails to do justice to the distinctive characteristics that emerge and function at these supraparticle levels.

Nevertheless, he admits, «end - directed thinking — teleological thinking — is appropriate in biology because, and only because, organisms seem [my emphasis] as if they were manufactured, as if they had been created by an intelligence and put to work.»

Premack suggests that the degree of abstraction can be measured by «transfer,» a similar response to conditions other than those in which the organism was trained (OAHC 424).

Each evolutionary event is conditioned by the whole preceding history of the species, by the environment in which it occurs, and possibly, in higher organisms with developed nervous systems, by the behavioral reactions of these organisms.

(4) Humans are neither soul alone, nor mind alone, nor body alone, but organisms compounded of soul - mind - body; in Christian language, «We are made of the dust of the earth and that dust has had breathed into it the life which is given by God.»

In reality, they assumed, a deeper analysis of organisms shows that their behavior is also explained by efficient causes operating among their parts or on them from without.

Read loses sight of Buber's concept of dialogue, however, when he suggests that Buber's teaching shows how to replace the inter-individual tensions of the classroom by «an organic mode of adaptation to the social organism as a whole» and when he reinterprets the teacher's concentration of an effective world as a selective screen in which what is kept in and what is left out is determined by the organic social pattern through the medium of the teacher's «sense of a total organism's feeling - behaviour.»

A second feature of the machine in contrast to the organism is that it is essentially unchanged by a change in its environment.

Whitehead did not speculate on the precise location of memory within the animal organism, but the most plausible extension of his theory suggests rather that memories are maintained for the soul by other occasions, thereby freeing the soul for its adventure into novelty.2 The way in which the conscious ego draws upon the ocean of unconscious feeling which sustains it may well reflect the way the soul draws upon other living occasions.

Second, epistemologically speaking, Bergson means by «matter» the way in which the intellect approaches all things (whether vital or inert) as if they were simply the sums of their parts — parts that are subject to being disassembled and re-assembled in any order whatsoever to serve the abstract ends of the intellect itself or the purposes of the organism that intellect serves.

The use of the term «purpose» here does not warrant, by itself, McHenry's conclusion that an individual organism alters the environment to «its own purpose,» although the passage does not exclude the presence of purpose in individual organisms.

The range of possible activity is determined by the complexity of the nervous system, both on a sensory as well as a motor level (MM 41)-- sensory in that with a system of low complexity, an organism is simply not aware of the vast variety of movements in the material field, motor in that the variety of responses necessary for free activity are not materially accessible (MM 19, 43).

The building block electronic and protonic actual occasions are, in the case of human beings, swept into vastly more complex, Chinese box - like sets of containing societies within which there are social levels that can be identified with cells, others which answer to Aristotle's levels of tissues and organs, and which finally are presided over by what Whitehead refers to as the regnant nexus, a social thread of complex temporal inheritance which, Whitehead suggests, wanders from part to part of the brain, is the seat of conscious direction of the organism as a whole, and answers to what in Plato and Aristotle is called the soul.