|
the
final piece
of the evolution puzzle
danny
vendramini
the main teem
theory hypotheses
Although
teem theory applies to all multicellular animals, when citing examples,
I’ve
mostly used humans because most of us are interested in how teems
affect our
own
species.
|
|
1
The
second evolution hypothesis
The
‘second evolution hypothesis’ argues that evolution on this planet is
regulated
by two separate evolutionary processes. In addition to natural
selection which
regulates physical evolution, (plus a small number of reflex
behaviours), a
second process emerged about 540 million years ago (which I call
‘teemosis’) to
regulate innate behaviour and instincts in multicellular animals.
|
|
2
The
teemosis evolutionary process
As an evolutionary process,
teemosis is
unusual because it doesn't affect physical characteristics. In fact, it
only
regulates the evolution of one thing – emotion, and only in
multicellular
animals. Significantly though, emotion can function as a biological
language that
can encode adaptive experiential information into DNA where it can be
inherited
to the next generation.
The teemosis process allows powerful emotional
responses (to singular environmental events and circumstances) to be
genetically encoded into DNA. These archived emotions provide the
individual
with an ‘emotional memory’ which can be inherited to offspring Because
this
emotional memory is encoded by powerful, traumatic emotions, I call it
a ‘teem’
(Trauma Encoded Emotional Memory.’)
|
|
3
The
CNS seismograph
hypothesis
This hypothesis argues that the
central
nervous system (CNS) rather than the brain is the real ‘emotion
producing organ’ in animals. This theory sees the CNS as a kind of
‘organic seismograph’ that produces ‘patterned neuronal activity’ when
stimulated by sensory stimuli from sensory receptors like eyes, ears
and noses. This constant stream of patterned neuronal activity is what
the organism experiences as emotion. Therefore, emotion is common to
all animals with a CNS and sensory organs.
According to this model, the
CNS is able to discriminate and interpret fluctuations in emotional
activity so that transduced sensory stimuli forms a ‘emotional
language.’
|
|
4
Transduction
theory
Transduction theory describes the
process
whereby stimuli from sensory organs are translated, or more accurately
‘transduced’ into variable patterns of neuronal activity (or emotion)
which the
CNS linguistically recognizes and interprets.
This theory argues that
every
sensory precept generates a unique pattern of emotional activity so,
for
example, the emotion generated by our eyes when looking at a cat will
be
different from the emotion generated by a different cat, and the
emotions will change depending on what the cat is doing. Emotional
transduction is adaptive because it creates a rudimentary perceptual
system that
doesn't depend on a functioning brain to work.
This hypothesis
tells us that every minute of
every day,
we are subliminally translating everything we see, hear, smell, touch
and taste
into an emotional language that only our CNS understands. The implications for human psychology are significant.
|
|
5
Seismographic
pathology and human
health
This hypothesis argues that
prolonged
over-stimulation of the CNS by ‘toxic’ transductions produces stress
emotions that precipitate psychopathology, disease and premature death
in humans. In other words, certain sights and sounds, when transduced,
can produce such toxic emotions that they damage the CNS, in some
cases, irreparably.
A new holistic view of human mental and emotional health will emerge
from an understanding of emotional transduction and its impact on the
CNS.
|
|
6
The
dual
perception hypothesis
This hypothesis argues that what
psychologists call perception is actually a fusion of two
radically
different perceptual systems – both using the same sensory organs but
processing sensory precepts in radically different ways. While the
brain
processes precepts into comprehensible, discernible images, sounds,
smells,
etc, the original archaic but never completely replaced ‘emotional
perception
system’ transduces images, sounds, smell etc into patterns of emotion
from
which our familiar emotions are constructed.
Human perception can only
be
understood in terms of a fusion between conscious or ‘cerebral’
precepts (processed
and comprehend by the cortex) and subliminal emotional precepts
generated
directly by the CNS.
|
|
|
7
Teem
theory of emotions and emotional
memory
While the patterned emotional
activity
generated by the CNS in response to sensory stimuli usually subsides
quite
quickly, occasionally the emotion is so traumatic it disrupts
homeostasis and
releases stress hormones that genetically archive the traumatic
emotions into
the person’s DNA, creating a permanent genetic record of the powerful
emotions.
These
emotions can be inherited and accessed by offspring providing them with
an
emotional memory of significant ancestral experiences.
According to this view, when we ‘feel’
an
emotion, we are in fact ‘recalling’ an emotional memory of a specific
real time
event that an ancestor experienced. All our emotions are acquired in
this way.
For example, humans can feel the emotion of jealousy only because an
archaic
individual ancestor (possibly a hominid, but more likely a primate)
genetically
archived these particular feelings and the triggers that activate them
into a
‘jealousy teem.’
Today, our myriad collection of jealousy teems
accumulated
over the eons provide us with the assortment of jealousy emotions’
ranging from
mild envy to homicidal rage.
|
|
8
Teem
theory of innate behaviour and
instincts
While teems are simply packages
(or
quanta) of inherited emotion, when triggered, certain emotions can
precipitate adaptive behaviours that do not need to be learnt. For
example, the
emotion of fear can precipitate defensive and escape behaviours.
Similarly, the
emotions released by a ‘romance teem’ will generate romantic behaviour,
while
emotions released by our ‘spider teem’ will usually precipitate
anti-spider
responses.
According to this hypothesis, all animal
instincts and innate behaviour, including our own ‘human nature’
originated as
individual teems, each one archived by an ancestral individual and
selected for
because it proved adaptive.
|
|
9
The
Monitory System hypothesis
This hypothesis
argues that all
teemic
species, from worms to whales have evolved unique neural modules and
sensory organs that allow them to monitor for the environmental cues
that trigger teems. In humans, this module is housed in the amygdaloid
complex, deep within the limbic system of our brains. The module
reviews the constant stream of transduced emotional stimuli from all
our sensory organs (including our skin) and when a teemic emotion is
detected, it triggers the teem and the emotions are expressed.
The
monitory system operates independently of our brains, (even when we’re
asleep) so remains a largely subliminal process. Nevertheless, it
influences every aspect of our lives.
In practical terms, most of the
stressed anxieties, depression, paranoia and tension that characterizes
human psychopathology can be traced back to a hypersensitive monitory
system that subliminally triggers powerful (often negative) emotions
that the person does not understand and is unable to deal with.
|
|
10
Natural
selection and the random
plateau hypothesis
Since
Darwin, biologists have
believed that natural selection (NS) created all life on earth – both
morphological and behavioural. I argue instead that natural selection
is
actually an ineffective evolutionary process incapable of creating
either
biotic complexity or biodiversity. This is because NS
relies on
mutations which are known to be random. While
this random mechanism can achieve simple levels of evolution
(microevolution), there is a limit to what NS can achieve (I call this
'the
random
plateau') before it plateaus off.
The
hypothesis predicted that some
other
evolutionary process must be responsible for the evolution of the
extraordinary
complexity and biodiversity we see all around us in nature.
|
|
11
The teem
theory of macroevolution
Although
the teemosis process
doesn’t
directly affect physical traits, my teem theory of macroevolution
argues that teems indirectly influence organic (ie, physical) evolution
in ten different ways.
This new theory of evolution argues that the
evolution of biological complexity and diversity is actually the result
of teemosis and natural selection working together rather than natural
selection on its own.
|
|
12
The teem
theory of sexual selection
Darwin’s
theory of sexual
selection
explains that evolution is often driven by mate choice, whereby an
individual, (usually a female) develops a preference for males
displaying certain traits. In this way, he argued, peacocks evolved
large flamboyant tails, not because they were adaptively useful, but
because they appealed to females.
While this brilliant theory has since
been confirmed by modern researchers, so far, no one has demonstrated
how the female’s sexual preference is first genetically encoded into
her DNA. The theory of ‘sexual preference teems’ appears to finally
explain this. Typically, a sexual preference teem occurs when a female
is so emotionally overwhelmed by a male displaying some new behavioural
or physical trait she encodes her ‘attraction emotions (desire, love
etc) into a new teem. Once encoded into her DNA, the powerful
attraction emotions are inherited by her offspring who will prefer
males displaying the same trait.
|
|
13 Teem
theory
of speciation
Extending the teem theory of sexual
selection, it appears plausible that new sexual preference teems are a
major
factor in speciation – the creation of new species. According to this
hypothesis, new species are created when an individual (usually a
female)
encodes a new ‘sexual preference teem’ that redefines her choice of
breeding
partners. Although the female’s offspring can theoretically interbreed
with
members of the parent population, because they inherit their mother’s
teemic
preference, they will only choose males that display the preferred
trait, be it
a physical characteristic or a particular behaviour (ie, a dance or
other
display.)
In this way, a viable new sibling species can be created
within a few
generations. I suggest that most new species evolve by this means.
|
|
14
Teem theory
of animal size
Why
do species vary so greatly in size? Biologically, there is no uniform
trend
towards larger species; no hard and fast evolutionary rule that says
animals must get bigger. Insects, among the most
successful and numerous creatures on Earth have remained minute while
the
Indrichotherium, the largest mammal of all time, is now extinct. In the
sea,
organisms vary from microscopic plankton to 30m long Blue whales
weighing over
112 tonnes.
In the absence of any scientific
consensus
that would explain the enormous disparity between species, I propose
that the
size of animals, (including humans) is controlled by a subset of
‘sexual
preference teems’ that I call ‘size preference teems.” Because size,
shape,
scale and even weight can be easily transduced into the teemic
emotional
language, females can encode a range of size preference teems – from
‘big is
beautiful’ to ‘small is sexy.’ Once a female has teemically encoded her
ideal
mate size, she will only mate with males of the correct size.
To show
how this
works, imagine way back in their mammalian past, a single female whale
- at the
time no bigger than a dog, may have encoded a ‘bigger the better teem’
- and
the race was on. By only mating with the biggest whales, her
descendants
eventually created today's majestic leviathans.
|
|
15 The
origins
of teemosis hypothesis
This
hypothesis dates the evolutionary
origins of teemosis to the Cambrian-Vendrian boundary, approximately
543
million years ago.
According to this theory, all complex instincts,
emotions
plus the evolution of biological complexity and species diversity date
from
this time. Before that, evolution was moderated exclusively by NS.
After that
date, evolution was moderated by both NS and teemosis.
The emergence of
teemosis at the basal Cambrian was I suggest, the most significant
moment in
the history of our planet. Teemosis revolutionized life on Earth.
|
|
16
Darwinian
instincts hypothesis
This theory asserts that for the first
3.2
billion years of life prior to the Cambrian emergence of teemosis (and
the
advent of the first complex instincts), innate behaviour and instincts
existed
but only in a very rudimentary form.
These ‘Darwinian instincts’ as I
call them
were in fact merely ‘reflex actions’ – simple gene based
stimulus- response
behaviours that facilitated basic survival in simple species.
Significantly
though, because they were derived from random mutations, these reflex
actions
could only be very simple and certainly didn't incorporate
environmental
factors.
Once teemosis emerged, Darwinian instincts were relegated to a
minor
role in behavioural ecology. Today, most animals, (including humans)
still
retain a few simple reflex behaviours.
|
|
17 The
Cambrian Explosion hypothesis
The fossil record reveals that for the
first 3.2 billion years, the only life was microscopic algae and other
very simple life forms, exactly as predicted by teem theory. Then in a
sudden explosion of complexity and diversity lasting only about 5 – 10
million years, the ancestors of all the species living today first
appeared. This is known as the ‘Cambrian explosion’ and its cause
remains one of the great mysteries of palaeontology.
Teem theory
explains this sudden explosion of morphological complexity and
biodiversity at the Cambrian-Vendian boundary as the result of the
sudden emergence and rapid spread of the teemosis evolutionary process.
|
|
18
The teemic
precedent hypothesis
This hypothesis argues that our major
brain
based (cerebral) biosystems – things like cognition, memory, learning,
attention, language and perception first evolved as exclusively
emotional
versions – as functional components and by-products of the teemosis
evolutionary process.
Millions of years later, when the first brains
emerged,
these rudimentary emotional versions of memory, attention, learning,
motivation, perception, communications and even cognition served as
biological
templates – or precedents that guided the evolution of cerebral
versions of
these essential biosystems. For example, emotional memory served as the
precedent for declarative memory, emotional perception guided the
evolution of
cerebral perception, and so on.
The evolution of complex systems like
cognition, learning, memory and indeed the brain itself would not
have been possible without
these early
emotional biosystems providing the first level of complexity.
The teemic precedent hypothesis explains
how 'irreducibly complex' organ like the mammalian brain could evolve
via natural selection. In doing so, it counters the 'intelligent
design' arguments of creationists.
|
|
19 Teemic
inheritance - the divided DNA
hypothesis
Since Gregor Mendel discovered the
rudiments of genetic inheritance, it has been thought that ‘Mendelian
inheritance’ is the only means of genetic inheritance – a premise
seemingly
confirmed by fifty years by genetic research. However, I show that
eukaryotic
DNA contains an undiscovered second mode of inheritance, based not on
protein-coding genes but on
transposable noncoding nucleotides or teems. ‘Teemic inheritance’ does
not
regulate the inheritance of physical traits. It evolved to regulate the
inheritance of emotions and innate behaviour.
This ‘divided DNA’
hypothesis provides a major breakthrough in the understanding of
molecular genetics.
|
|
20 Teem
theory
of Personality
Teems are stored in special strings of
noncoding DNA. Unlike protein-coding genes that remain
very stable and resistant to environmentally induced mutations, teemic
strings
tend to
be ‘hypermutational.’ This means the emotions archived in each teem
undergoes modifications over time. These changes I suggest,
create individual variation (or ‘personality’) in teemic species. That
is to
say, as teems are modified by mutations, sexual reproduction and
slippage, the
resultant modifications (called ‘polymorphisms’) produce variations in
a
person’s emotional responses which manifests as ‘personality.’
According to
this hypothesis, personality is a naturally occurring by-product of the
teemosis process. It explains why teemic organisms from flatworms to
humans
display individuality.
|
|
21 The DNA
fingerprinting hypothesis
Genetic profiling (or ‘DNA
fingerprinting’) has been used for twenty years to determine
individuality and parentage by measuring differences in polymorphisms
of noncoding DNA nucleotides. The process is very accurate even though
geneticists don’t know the significance of these highly variable
polymorphisms. However, if the teem theory of personality is correct,
and individual personality accumulates as polymorphisms of ncDNA, it
tells us that DNA fingerprinting (which measures these polymorphisms)
is actually a measurement of
personality.
This fits with what we know about personality - that every
human is unique and displays a individualized personality.
|
|
|
22 The Teem
theory of art
While humans often cite our use of art
as something that distinguishes us from all other animals, teem theory
argues that art evolved as a biological ‘component’ of the teemosis
process and is therefore common to all teemic species. It is widely
used by teemic species in habitat construction, mating displays and
communication.
This theory sees art as the expression of ‘aesthetic
teems’ – teems that produce emotions that guide the individual by a
trial and error process towards some goal. For example, the aesthetic
emotions released by a beaver’s ‘dam teem’ guide the beaver in the
construction of its dam, informing the selection of every log and
branch and generally guiding the placement of each piece of wood until
the dam ‘feels right’ – ie. when the dam emotions are perfectly
expressed. This is similar to the way aesthetic emotions subliminally
guide the sculptor’s chisel, the artist’s brush and the poet’s pen. The
artist manipulates the medium (be it paint, stone or words) in a trial
and error process, guided by an ephemeral coterie of subtle aesthetic
emotions. When the work produces the most satisfying emotions, the art
is complete.
|
|
23 The cancer
hypothesis
Teem theory asserts
that traumatic life
experiences - the death of a spouse, accidents, war, love and other
highly
emotional circumstances can precipitate a teemic mutation in human
ncDNA. While
most teemic mutations occur in introns and other noncoding regions
where they
do not interfere with protein manufacture, a teemic mutation may
occasionally
be transposed into or near a protein-coding exon that regulates
a fundamental cellular process such as cell growth, apoptosis,
or tumour
suppression. If the teemic mutation is not repaired by enzymes, it may
disrupt
protein synthesis resulting in disease such as cancer.
The implications
of teem
theory for human health and psychology are too extensive to be dealt
with here.
|
|
Conclusion
These
hypotheses
represent only a portion of the new holistic picture of nature that is
revealed by teem theory. At least as many hypotheses again are
described
in the book.
The sheer breadth and interconnectedness of teem theory suggests it may
be a kind of 'unified field
theory' - a simple explanation of the workings of the nature that hold
true over a wide range of exploration.
At the very least, teem theory reveals that emotion, so
long disparaged by scientists as ephemeral and almost unworthy
of serious study, is actually
one of the most important
biological forces in nature.
|
Home
Copyright:
2005-2010: Danny Vendramini
|
Kardoorair
Press Australia
"I
don't think I've enjoyed a book more than 'Them and Us' in my life."
Don Burke. Radio
2UE. 24th September. 2009
THEM AND US
How Neanderthal
predation created modern humans
by
Danny Vendramini
"Sometimes
it takes an outsider to cut through the routines of interpretation in
the most intractable problems in science. That is what
Vendramini's
approach offers the reader in his daring claims about the interactions
between humans and their most famous evolutionary relatives, the
Neanderthals. In doing so he provokes lots of new thoughts for
professional and lay reader alike."
Iain Davidson, Emeritus
Professor of
Archaeology, University of New England. Visiting Professor of
Australian Studies, Harvard University, Massachusetts
website www.themandus.org
|
|
