Can't follow all of this post but

>A society in which predation is abolished must by definition be ill
as
>evolution is not only halted, but can slide backwards.

is questionable (always IMHO of course).
Leaving aside the question of how accurate the currently accepted
evolution "model" is, one may argue that intelligence is a direct
outcome of the evolutionary process, and that behaviour which springs
from it, while not the same in general form as past evolutionary
actions, is still a valid evolutionary process. To write off new
behvious (eg abolition of predation) MAY be to fail to take advantage
of the new directions evolution has taken us in :-).

Note that stage 1 evolution (ie prior to intelligence) is BLIND.
Consider the (theorised) evolutionbary process following an upward
advantage path. If there is a dip in the advantage path that is
deeper than can be jumped across by random mutation then the system
will stall at that point no matter how great the gains to be made
beyond that point if only the "evolutionary jump" could have been a
little greater. Predation has been a tool of the "small evolutionary
jumps". Intelligence allows one/us to study all the possible
outcomes, no mattr how distant and then see if we can work out how to
"jump" to the best ones or how to plan sub-optimal steps towards the
best ones. Always of course assuming that we can work out what "best"
is.

eg "better" evolution may lead to us keeing ALL our gene pool and
working out how to use it to the benefit of all and how to "fix" the
broken bits rtaher than just using stage-one-evolution-predation to
wipe out the weak.

HOWEVER - the fact that we are plowing headlong into total disaster
by random genetic manipulation rather than taking a
whole-world-advantage  view suggests that we don't know what best is.
This is a superb example of predation by one group (eg Monsanto and
their ilk) at the expense of the whole. Are M' and friends going to
gain personal genetic advantage through their predation?

Even the well meaning gene therapists with their "cures" for exotic
diseases, by rushing in now rather than taking a careful 50 or 100
years of careful world-coordinated study, are leading us on to
disaster on a heretofore unseen scale (except maybe like that at eg
the Pliocine [spelling]? boundary).


>My message ? Life must be earned, not owed to us. Bring back the
>sabretooth tiger, lose the long range weapons. Ask a Dodo, Moa etc,
>silence talks to careful listeners.


Is this lose or loose :-)  ?

It may be possible for the stronger (in whatever sense) to earn life
for the weaker.
Recognition and implementation of this may perhaps be an indicator of
what being really stronger is really about.



regards


            Russell McMahon