.

 16.11.2002   16.11.2002   16.11.2002   16.11.2002   

I consider the results of the statistic study, included in MeMint, with the longitudinal data of the Young Adulthood Study, 1939-1967 to be conclusive about the genetic influence on intelligence (r2 till 0,99), the significance of the less powerful gene, important functionalities of the sexual diversification and about the existence of a teleological evolution.
In other words, most of the main previsions of the GTCEL.


Statistical Annexe

 16.11.2002   16.11.2002   16.11.2002   16.11.2002   

  .   .   .   .   .    .   

GTCEL free e-book (zip format)

 

 

 

Translate     Last update:   September 2002

GENERAL THEORY OF THE CONDITIONAL EVOLUTION OF LIFE
.

. Introduction.  

 

. Concepts of evolution, life and vital impulse systems.  

 

 

. Critic of the previous theories.  

 

 

. The evolution of life.  

 

 

. GTCEL - Definition, characteristics and conclusions.  

 

 

. Validation of the theory.  

 

 

.   Computer simulation.

 

 

. Theory implications.  

 

 

. Apendix.  

 

 

.   .   .  

This is a translation of a reduce version of the GTCEL e-book. (The full version is in Spanish)
It is explicitly forbidden to make unauthorized copies o prints (Except for students at school)
You may get the e-book from the download page

.   .   .  

 
© 2002, José Molina

.   .   .   .   .   .  

 
.

.        .    .    .    .

NOTE: The model of the inheritance of intelligence has been validated using the longitudinal data set of the Young Adulthood Study, 1939-1967. . (r2 = 0,96 and highers)

.

.

.

The concept of life is one of the most difficult concepts to define. In fact there is no general agreement in what life is.

At least we can think the two following types of approaches to this concept:

There are various definitions of life:

  • The scientist, where it is defined as the internal force of animals and plants.

  • The religious, where life is considered as some kind of spirit that, for certain religious, in humans will not die with the body.

  • The philosophical, where life will be the internal force of the beings that have it.

The scientist position limits the concept of life to animal and plants, while the philosophical one does not make that restriction. In other words, science will limit the concept unless there is a proof that other beings are alive; on the contrary, philosophy will not make any restriction unless there is a proof to do it.

We are closer to the philosophical position and we think that science should be neutral in the sense that we do not know exactly the nature and origin of life. Therefore, science should recognise its limits and declare that it is not clear if life is only related to animals and plants or if it is also related with any kind of energy or matter.

From a personal or internal point of view, we may realise that life without intelligence cannot exist, that intelligence without memory does not make sense. Also, for our nature, life without time or love is difficult to imagine. The same way, life with no freedom does not seem to be possible. All these concepts are sufficient and necessary conditions of life, each one implies the others and vice versa.

We could say that the essential characteristic of life is freedom. This one and love are more relevant than the intelligence, memory or time, and love would be too poetic.

From a poetic perspective we could say: "Love is the first concept included in the genetic information".

Science has a enormous tendency to attribute random reasons to the unknown facts or effects without any king of proof. It could be possible that energy or light has a very little degrees of freedom, so little that we can not measure or detect its free behaviour. we could say a similar comment about killing or eating plants, we do not detect they suffer but it makes sense that they do not like to die.

The concept of life in itself it is not relevant for the GTCEL in its scientist aspects, but the wide concept of life helps to understand this theory.

The concept of life is related with the concept of evolution but Darwin did not define life; in fact, he talked about evolution of the species and not about evolution of life.

To reduce the evolution of life to pure chance is almost to kill its real concept.

The systems that behave like live beings in their main characteristics will evolve with same rules as life itself.

We can mention as vital impulse systems any king of association of living beings like a nation. Another type of theses systems will be the different languages, etc.

.

.

.

.    .    .