(May 2, 2018 at 2:27 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote:(May 2, 2018 at 2:20 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: That is the broadest possible definition, similar to defining thinking as neurological state change. But a narrower definition is more useful.
When definition is used for rhetorical argument rather than to help guide an edifying experience, it is well to tailor the scope of the definition to the actual argument at hand.
Anom, what definition would you use if someone asked you to define evolution? Without spending paragraphs outlining every specific, "changes in allele frequency over time" is a pretty darn good starting point. And changes in allele frequency + time = speciation. if that were the definition that was popularized, I think we'd be in a hell of a lot better position than half the country thinking evolution means "your granddad was a monkey" or some shit like that. "Changes in allele frequency over time" isn't incorrect, and it's not misleading.
Change in allele frequency over time does not clearly mean speciation if the population does not separate and environmental condition remains little changed. Even if allele changes mean descendants a million years hence can’t breed with ancestors a million years age, the above stated condition suggest phenotypically the populations would remain more or less static, and there never were simultaneously two non-interbreeding populations that can be considered separate species.
Again, broading th definition of a process to include everything that utilized the most basic mechanism underlying the process makes the process a superfluous concept.