Re: Experiences with Atkins diet

From: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky (sentience@pobox.com)
Date: Wed Apr 30 2003 - 16:09:09 MDT

  • Next message: Brian Atkins: "Re: Experiences with Atkins diet"

    gts wrote:
    >
    > I have faith in the *science* of evolution, yes. I believe it is well
    > established that living organisms are best adapted to the environments in
    > which they evolved. This principle is applicable to diets. I mentioned that
    > in my view humans are as well adapted to paleodiets as giraffes are well
    > adapted to eating the leaves of tall trees. In giraffes this dietary
    > adaptation is extremely obvious. Unfortunately in humans our dietary
    > adaptive traits are mostly invisible, buried in our metabolisms.

    Gts, I say again that you are making the classic Panglossian error, which
    is very well known to evolutionary theorists. Living organisms are
    adapted to the environments in which they evolved. That is, when living
    organisms adapt, they adapt to their environments, rather than something
    else. It does not follow that an organism is "best adapted" or even "well
    adapted" to that environment. An organism that has been adapted by
    natural selection for a constant diet, and choosing a diet which is the
    best fuel for that organism, are two different optimization problems. The
    diet that is best suited to an organism that adapted to a paleolithic diet
    is not necessarily a paleolithic diet. There are valid arguments for the
    paleolithic precautionary principle but the one you are using is a logical
    non-sequitur. It could as easily be used to prove the harmfulness of
    bathing, antibiotics or air-conditioning.

    > Would you argue with a talking giraffe who told you that he thought his long
    > neck was for eating the leaves of tall trees? Would you ask him if he was a
    > Luddite if he insisted that the leaves of tall trees should be the main
    > staple of his diet?

    The second statement does not follow from the first. The second statement
    may be *true*, but the first statement is not what it follows from.

    -- 
    Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
    Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 30 2003 - 16:19:50 MDT