7.2. TREND (purposefulness, non-fortuity) of evolution
Development (growth and complication) of each individual (its ontogenesis) which (as it is known from comparison of embryology and paleontology data) repeats/copies development of a biological species (its phylogenesis), is neither casual nor spontaneous. Process of evolution, of complication of forms of life (biological species) in their phylogenesis course is teleological (is purposeful) – at least at some/many of its stages (phases/steps). Not only general/basic principles of thermodynamics (namely: spontaneously only destructive processes, i.e. with reduction of objects' complexity and with entropy increase, can occur) compel to come to this conclusion. It can be proved also by "the rule of contraries" method, known to everyone already from a mathematics school curriculum (namely: carrying of an opposite statement up to the logic end leads to the internal contradiction: to a contradiction with the initial statement/assumption).
A. Many of phylogenetic complications – morphological and functional – occur in several stages, each of which is fatal at its separate realization. Only in strict sequence of their set conducts to creating of new morphological structure and/or to performance of new physiological function, i.e. to achievement of the purpose. The more stages are in successfully ended process of development, the more truly its accidental arising is impossible. Already a simple cell division (mitosis) occurs not less, than in four stages (prophase–metaphase–anaphase–telophase); for comparison: there are almost a dozen of stages in the mechanism of blood coagulation at a vessel damage (rupture).
Meiosis, the sexual cell division, arises (in phylogenesis) not instead of the sexless mitosis but in a parallel with it:
each unicellular organism can (in principle, potentially) to divide by any of these two ways. [There are more than 30 thousand species of them, amd such a diversity can provoke an idea of fortuity of their forms.]
Meiosis is much more complex than mitosis, but – which is the main: its products (4 new, haploid cells) are not capable to self-dependent new divisions. For life continuation such a cell needs to meet another haploid cell. A sporadic transition of a separate cell to meiosis would be equivalent its useless loss (even if meiosis would be completed successfully, that itself would be possible only as purposeful process).
Hence, evolution is teleological, at least at this very stage. It can be successful (and – which is the main – can be not fatal) only if many individuals of a species begin to operate equally, by a uniform, complex (in order to not to tell artful, wise) program simultaneously (together, as though suddenly!). This requirement is indispensable. And it is carried out.
B..Similarly, and even more brightly, the trend (the teleologicalness) is evinced in the
coordinated formation of mutually additional structures and functions at which an organ of one individual supports a function of another individual.
So an udder (an organ) of a cow is mutually complementary with the sucking reflex (a function) of a calf. Mammals could not arise by casual evolution. If the PURPOSE does not exist IN ADVANCE as the [cow+calf] system functioning, (so) an udder gives no advantages to a separate cow (separate from her calf); on the opposite: an udder both is more vulnerable as an object for predator's attacks than cow's other body parts and is a potential source of specific (new, additional) diseases.
C. There could not arise accidentally, without trend –
• poisons, their organs (glandulae and teeth, stings etc.) – they were/are initially intended for protection and/or for an attack – there was a PURPOSE;
• electro-active fishes' organs;
• wings neither of insects nor of birds without primary posed PURPOSE – to fly;
• eyes, organs of sight without primary posed PURPOSE – to see;
• organs of acusis without primary posed PURPOSE – to hear;
• teeth, etc – practically all specialized organs and systems.
There are cases of morphological form advancing progress, i.e. when individuals of a species gets organs still rudimentary and not bearing really any function, but working perfectly at the next evolutionary step. L.S. Berg/Ë.Ñ. Áåðã (1876-1950) pointed a number of such cases. For instance [ 10 ]:
D. Some ontogenesis stages are realized on the basis (with participation) of auxiliary morphological elements which could not be realized in phylogenesis as independent organisms. These morphological forms were initially realized exactly and only as auxiliary, i.e. with a definite PURPOSE – to serve as a base for realization of some other morphological form.
The phenomenon of forestalling of attributes is widely spread both in an animal, and in a vegetative kingdoms, but it usually squeezed into Procrustean bed of the standard theories. Here is an example. Adults ascidiae are the animals which should be put in system below molluscs. But their larvae, as A.O. Kovalevskiy/À.Î. Êîâàëåâñêèé found out, have a number of attributes which are typical for vertebrates: a chord, back nervous system, acoustical bubble, an organ similar to eye, branchial fissures. An adult ascidia loses almost all of those. Possession of vertebrates' attributes by ascidia is interpreted usually as a result of its degeneration, implying that vertebrates were their ancestors. But for many reasons it is an improbable hypothesis. Actually ascidiae, and especially they larvae, were developed with some features of vertebrates' structure by means of advancing progress.
So, temporarily, only and SPECIALLY to support anaphase of mitosis, the "mitotic device" is formed, INTENDED for division of a genetic material strictly equally between daughter (more exactly – sister) cells; this device constitutes neither organelle (constantly existing, functioning in a cell), nor, all the more, separate organism. It cannot and could not exist independently. It would perish at casual arising and could not (in the further) support anaphase.
So, a chrysalis is formed SPECIALLY for transformation of a caterpillar into a butterfly, but it cannot, and could not in a phylogenesis course, function as an independent adult insect (imago). For comparison: reproduction ability of organisms at a larva stage (neoteinia, from Hellenic neos – unripe and teino – I stretch; pedogenesis, from Hellenic pais – a child ), which is characteristic (for example) for some flies, is a precedent proving that in principle a caterpillar can be an independent organism (a species), and was those in their (flies) phylogenetic past.
These cases testify to existence of development TENDENCY which (can lead both to success and to a dead end, but irrespective of it) completely EXCLUDES evolution fortuity.
NAS denys teleology formally but recognizes it de facto. For example (from an Encyclopedia): An adult mayfly (Ephemeroptera) lives only some hours: its task (!) – it means the PURPOSE (!) – is to find the partner and to postpone eggs. It eats nothing and has no oral device at all..