Comments on: Dawkins…. On Purpose

By: Diane G.

Diane G. — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 16:41:35 +0000

Indeed, your archaeo sounded more correct to me as well. A little Google on archi, tho, suggests he’s in fair bounds. It may even have connotations he likes that archaeo doesn’t:

archi-â??
a combining form with the general sense â??first, principal,â? that is prefixed to nouns denoting things that are earliest, most basic, or bottommost (archiblast; archiphoneme; architrave); or denoting individuals who direct or have authority over others of their class, usually named by the base noun (archimandrite; architect).

Also, especially before a vowel, arch-.
Compare arch- 1 ,
arche-.

——————————————————————————–

Origin:
< Gk, comb. form akin to arch beginning, Ã¡rchos leader, Ã¡rchein to be the first, command Dictionary.com Unabridged Based on the Random House Dictionary, Â© Random House, Inc. 2009. Cite This Source archi- or arch- pref. Chief; highest; most important: archiepiscopal. Earlier; primitive: archenteron. [French archi- and Italian arci-, both from Latin archi-, from Greek arkhi-, arkh-, from arkhein, to begin, rule.] The American HeritageÂ® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright Â© 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. Cite This Source Archi- Ar"chi- [L., archi-, Gr. 'archi-, a prefix which is from the same root as 'a`rchein to be first, to begin; 'archh the first place, beginning; 'archo`s chief. Cf. AS. arce-, erce-, OHG. erzi-, G. erz-.] A prefix signifying chief, arch; as, architect, archiepiscopal. In Biol. and Anat. it usually means primitive, original, ancestral; as, archipterygium, the primitive fin or wing. Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, Â© 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc. Cite This Source archi- or arch- or arche- pref. Earlier; primitive: archenteron. The American HeritageÂ® Stedman's Medical Dictionary Copyright Â© 2002, 2001, 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 07:16:02 +0000

I guess my brain adjusted for this. Archi makes no sense if he means old.

By: Diane G.

Diane G. — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 02:57:56 +0000

Just a quick clarification on the pre-fixes. He used “archi-” and “neo.” It was a great chat, and because I was cozy with PZ, I actually got to chat with him for a few minutes.

Agreed-thanks for chiming in. I was beginning to think my memory was faulty after so many “archeos” here…

After I asked him a few questions, he asked if I am an antropologist (reading your blog pays off!)
Posted by: Mike Haubrich, FCD | March 5, 2009 4:29 PM

Dang, just when I’d mastered “myrmecologist!”

(I know, I know! Just a typo! Don’t shoot me!)

By: Nathan Myers

Nathan Myers — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:54:45 +0000

Musing about purpose can lead to interesting questions. For example, “What is the purpose of a virus?” Obviously its present purpose is to replicate the genes in it. But how did it originate? Was that its original purpose, or did virus particles fill another role before being co-opted?

We see a modern case of wasps producing and injecting virus particles to deliver genes that do not include those necessary to produce more virus particles. In that case it seems pretty clear the virus was co-opted by the wasp into its own genome at a late date.

I’m predicting that, if we look, we’ll find bacteria or archaea that invented phages for some practical purpose that went horribly wrong when the phages got hold of their own code. A bacterium that can recruit large numbers of members of random other lineages to produce environmental proteins, to order, has an advantage over those that must produce the proteins themselves. A bacterium that can make its rivals flood themselves with toxins has an advantage over one that must produce and eject its own toxins.

I wonder if this is the reason for the prevalence of RNA viruses. If you want to recruit help to produce proteins, RNA is the right stuff to send out.

By: SocraticGadfly

SocraticGadfly — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:44:32 +0000

Within the “archeo,” did Dawkins go off into adaptive purpose vs. something like Gould’s “spandrels,” over which he and Dennett sparred long and hard?

By: PeteC

PeteC — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:00:47 +0000

Daniel Dennett is another person who’s written a lot on the idea that human goals are predicated upon the proto-goals of replicating molecules; things that could be called purposes only emerged after natural selection had been going for a while. Did Dawkins mention any of that?

By: Mike Haubrich, FCD

Mike Haubrich, FCD — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:29:08 +0000

Just a quick clarification on the pre-fixes. He used “archi-” and “neo.” It was a great chat, and because I was cozy with PZ, I actually got to chat with him for a few minutes.

After I asked him a few questions, he asked if I am an antropologist (reading your blog pays off!)

By: Bosch's Poodle

Bosch's Poodle — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:27:59 +0000

I know social scientists hate this word, but I think you have to look at culture to understand why and how human brains (and therefore human beings) do things like performance art and pogroms and skydiving. Culture accumulates like residue (or a closet full of tools) over thousands of years, and we reuse and slowly adapt these cultural assets. So we can benefit in incredible ways from the efforts of millions of other people over millennia. That accumulated, reusable culture changes how we behave, individually, much more than we’re capable of adding to or changing that accumulated culture. And I don’t just mean technology, but cultural meaning – the reasons we do silly things like build airplanes and then jump out of them over and over.

By: BAllanJ

BAllanJ — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 13:40:17 +0000

I have a little story that may apply in the neo- archaeo- discussion. It describes a conversation that takes place in Nunavut between an Inuit elder and a Southerner (a Canadian from south of 60 degrees N latitude) who has lived in the north just long enough to think he knows something (and is about to learn something about the Inuit sense of humour).

During the conversation, the elder asks if the southerner knows what the main use of seal skin is in the north. The southerner smiles and says “yes I do. They’re used for making kamiks (waterproof boots)”. The elder smiles and says “No, the main use is for holding the seal’s guts in while he swims around”.

So the elder is more attuned to the archaeo-use, since he’s only a generation or 2 from bare subsistence. The southerner sees things from the neo-use end of things.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:20:35 +0000

Bob: Yes, I agree with your point, but as RBH is riffing on, I’m not sure I see the difference between two atoms sticking together because of the properties of those atoms vs. a genome changing because of selection.

Beowulff: Maybe assigned purpose is engineering by lazy people.

No, folks, I did not get to the beer fest. Amanda and I went straight home. Julia was home sick and it was a school night for all of us. I’m sorry we missed it, but we really had to go.