<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.quotation, li.quotation, div.quotation
{mso-style-name:quotation;
mso-style-link:"quotation Char";
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
font-weight:bold;
font-style:italic;}
span.quotationChar
{mso-style-name:"quotation Char";
mso-style-link:quotation;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;
font-weight:bold;
font-style:italic;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>All, or any, <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I have been wondering all week why none of you have sent me insults about the text below. It appears that ONE of the reasons may be that I never sent it to you. Well, now is your chance. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=quotation><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>From the natural design perspective, design is a property of things, not of minds that make things. The perspective asserts that a thing is experienced as designed when it is one of an array of things existing in an array of environments, such that there is a systematic relation between things and environments. Against the background of such systematic relations, it becomes possible to say that this particular thing is well-designed for this particular environment. Over the years, we have used many different examples to illustrate this principle. We can say, for instance, that a particular building is well designed as a studio because there exists an array of buildings, and array of functions they perform, and this building fits the pattern of buildings where artists reside and work. Or we can say that this tool is designed for shaving wood because there is a tool kit of tools, and array of circumstances in which they are put to use, and that there is in general a relation between the form of the tool of the kit and the use to which it is put. Or, we might say that the hefty bill of this Evening Grosbeak is designed for cracking seeds, because you see at your feeder birds with an array of beak sizes and shapes, an array of beak sizes, and there is a relation between the manner in which seeds are eaten and beak shapes <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=quotation><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=quotation><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>In several publications, we have taken on the project of recasting problematic concepts in psychology and biology as instances of natural design. The goal has been, from the start, to sort out the describers of natural design from its explainers so as to better understand the structure of psychological and biological explanations. </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=quotation><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=quotation><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Today we will take on <u>epiphenomenality</u> and its companion, <u>exaptation</u>. We will argue for a definition of an epiphenomenon as a consequence of a structure’s (or behavior’s) design which has played no part the development of that structure (or behavior). Further that such an epiphenomenal consequence may be said to exapted when it the structure shows evidence of design for the originally epiphenomenal consequence. The concept of exaptation arose from a publication by Lewontin and Gould (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jay_Gould" title="Stephen Jay Gould"><span style='font-style:normal'>Stephen Jay Gould</span></a></span><cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-style:normal'>; </span></cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lewontin" title="Richard Lewontin"><span style='font-style:normal'>Richard Lewontin</span></a></span><cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-style:normal'> (1979), "The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme", Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B, </span></cite><cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal'>205</span></cite><cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-style:normal'> (1161): 581–598, </span></cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibcode_(identifier)" title="Bibcode (identifier)"><span style='font-style:normal'>Bibcode</span></a></span><cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-style:normal'>:</span></cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><a href="https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1979RSPSB.205..581G"><span style='font-style:normal'>1979RSPSB.205..581G</span></a></span><cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-style:normal'>, </span></cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doi_(identifier)" title="Doi (identifier)"><span style='font-style:normal'>doi</span></a></span><cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-style:normal'>:</span></cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><a href="https://doi.org/10.1098%2Frspb.1979.0086"><span style='font-style:normal'>10.1098/rspb.1979.0086</span></a></span><cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-style:normal'>, </span></cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PMID_(identifier)" title="PMID (identifier)"><span style='font-style:normal'>PMID</span></a></span><cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-style:normal'> </span></cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42062"><span style='font-style:normal'>42062</span></a></span><cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-style:normal'>, </span></cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S2CID_(identifier)" title="S2CID (identifier)"><span style='font-style:normal'>S2CID</span></a></span><cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-style:normal'> </span></cite><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><a href="https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:2129408"><span style='font-style:normal'>2129408</span></a>) The most unforgettable example of a biological exaptation is the hypertrophied clitoris or pseudo penis of the female spotted hyena. Hyena groups are organized into matriarchal clans, headed by a dominant female Competition at the kill is ferocious and the most dominant female secures the most resources both for herself and for her offspring. In maintaining her dominance, she uses her hypertrophied cliteris as a display organs, leading to the obvious conclusion that the organs were adapted for display. This conclusion turned out to be false, The hypertrophy of the organ is in fact the epiphenomal consequence of a design for high levels of aggression in clan-leading females. Such selection led in turn to selection for hyperproduction of testosterone-like substances in the blood of young females leading to the development of the hypertrophied clitoris. That the organ became effective in display was an exaptation an played no part in its original development. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=quotation><span style='font-size:9.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal>Yes, that animal actually exists. They are large, they are ferocious, their jaws are incredibly powerful, and they would soon kill you as look at you. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Nick <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Nick Thompson<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><a href="mailto:ThompNickSon2@gmail.com">ThompNickSon2@gmail.com</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><a href="https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/">https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>