Natural Selection And the Functional Purpose Of Homosexuality (Reason And Religion version)
These remarks were prompted by the false assertion made by a certain German creationist and Christianist (henceforth "Dear Creationist") that homosexuality is "unnatural". Here is my argument that it is very natural indeed. 1. We know from algorithms…
These remarks were prompted by the false assertion made by a certain German creationist and Christianist (henceforth "Dear Creationist") that homosexuality is "unnatural". Here is my argument that it is very natural indeed.
1. We know from algorithms generated through an evolutionary process that a Teleological Object need not be designed by an intelligence. A teleological object (TO) is an object that, at a bare minimum, has a functional purpose within a system. A carburetor is a teleological object because its functional purpose within the system of the engine is to mix gasoline with air. The heart is a teleological object because it has the functional purpose of pumping blood so that it circulates through the body.
A search algorithm is a teleological object because it has the functional purpose of locating specific things within, say, text or code.
Now evolutionary algorithms are very much a thing. Someone specifies certain objects (say, code implementing different versions of a search algorithm) as "individuals", gives the "individuals" the ability to reproduce, random "mutations" are introduced, and a way of culling out the pitiful sad-sack algorithms that cannot make the cut because they are too slow. At the end of the process, we get an algorithm that is faster than any algorithm designed and coded by a human intelligence.
When I first encountered news of these about 20 years ago, it was frequently noted in the trade magazines that that often human beings were not able to understand the code implementing the algorithm and see why it was faster. This specific Teleological Object, the algorithm implemented by code, no more has a designer than a "novel" generated by the proverbial six monkeys typing has an "author". The process generates the Teleological Object has an intelligent designer, but it does not follow that the Teleological objects generated by this system has a designer.
So we know that a Teleological Object need not be designed by an intelligence, human, simian, or divine. Perhaps it is not impossible that a TO must have an ancestor that was designed by an intelligence (but why?). But the TO itself need not be designed.
2. We can determine what is the functional purpose of a Teleological Object by asking what its selective advantage is. For example, the selective advantage of that latest algorithm to survive the culling process is that it performs the search more quickly than the others. And performing searches is its functional purpose.
The selective advantage of the darker coloration of the English Peppered Moth is that it helps the moth evade predators by blending in with its surroundings. Camouflage is the functional purpose of the darker color. The answer to the question 'why did English Peppered Moths become darker in color?' is 'in order to effect camouflage.'
The selective advantage of the antiques shop that encourages its salespeople to make a profit on sales is that it doesn't quickly go bankrupt. The purpose of a sale is to make money. (By the way, this is a NORM, and not an unbreakable rule, because of course it may make sense to sell loss-leaders at a loss. Once you have lured the potential customers in with the loss leaders, you then get them to buy the Gutenberg Bible you have in stock. It is interesting a how norms can arise along with TO's. But I digress.)
3. Homosexuality has a selective advantage within our species, apparently by fostering pro-sociality. That it does have at least one selective advantage (and probably several) is indisputable, Dear Creationist, as you would see if you bothered to read the two articles I linked to. It is just a matter of identifying what those are. The "super uncles" of Samoa offer a clue. Kin selection seems to be a thing not just for bees, but for us as well. (Your homework for tonight -- read up on kin selection. You may do that after you finish reading up on natural vs. unnatural eros in the *PHAEDRUS* and in the *LAWS*; and finish writing the paper I am requiring from you specifying how you got this WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! I expect you to show sufficient contrition in your essay.)
4. If the selective advantage of homosexuality turns out to be one form or another of pro-sociality, as the two articles suggest, then 'fostering pro-sociality' is the functional purpose of homosexuality within our species. It is something that facilitates our nature as social beings. Without its genetic presence in our species encouraging a kind of self-domestication (see the first article I linked to ... also see the post I linked to for comic relief), human nature would be different from what it is now, and surely much less sufferable than it is even now. We would be more like Chimpanzees and less like Bonobos. Our lives would be even more nightmarish than they are now.
5. So homosexuality is natural in two ways. First, it is something that is part and parcel of the natural process, evolution, that shapes our species. Second, it is part of the telos and nature of 'the human being'. 'The human being', Elizabeth Anscombe notes some place, has 24 teeth (even though some individuals may have fewer or more teeth.) Just so, 'the human being' is domesticated and pro-social to at least a minimal degree -- enough to at least remove the dishes before peeing in the sink (another NORM which some individuals will violate). even though some individuals neglect to of a subset of human individuals and is therefore an aspect of their nature and a variation on human nature itself.
In short, your claim that homosexuality is unnatural is simply false. This is so even if by 'nature' you mean something like 'essential form' and not As the Catholic priest and Rene Girard scholar James Allison said: "...we [gay people] are bearers of a regularly occurring, non-pathological minority variant in the human condition."
I will cap this off with the suggestion that kin selection be mentioned in the Horrible Histories Darwin video shown above.
No comments:
Post a Comment