http://www.newhistorian.com/tiger-hunting-strategy-as-old-as-tigers-themselves/4376/
Neo-Darwinism theorizes that species evolve slowly as slight variations in traits, which supposedly vary at random between individuals, are selected for or against depending on how well these variations adapt the organism to the environment. According to consensus theory, over a long enough period of time and across a wide enough population base, slight variations become full blown expressions of a fully adaptive feature and that then becomes encoded in a species genome. According to this theory proto-tigers at the beginning of their evolution should vary in their manner of striking at their prey until at some point the optimal strategy was arrived at through random mutations in the face of selective pressures, i.e. the capacity of the prey to resist tiger strikes. This article points out that in regards to the most important trait relative to a tiger and its environment, i.e. its capacity to make a living, tigers have been taking down their prey the same way since the very beginning of the species.
Meanwhile the Constructal law demonstrates that were we to replay the evolutionary tape, in contravention to the random theory of evolution, the same basic body shapes and therefore the same behaviors would have evolved because these must conform to the Constructal Law, an immutable feature of nature. Anatomy, locomotion and therefore behavior are not the result of random mutations. They result from an optimal locomotive rhythm, i.e. the minimization of all the resistances that inhibit forward movement. Since there is only one way to move an object of mass efficiently and everything about the body and the mind must conform to this thermodynamic reality, movement and behavior could not have evolved at random. Moving the body’s center-of-gravity efficiently, and then moving it efficiently relative to the capacity of another animal to move their bodies efficiently, in this case the tiger relative to its prey, can only evolve according to principles of energy. In other words, according to a principle of conductivity.
Therefore if we want to understand the animal mind, and because everything about the animal mind evolved to move the body efficiently, with its capacity to persist depending on its capacity to move well relative to the capacity of other animals to move well, we need to focus on principles of energy rather than intentional states. This approach renders a systems logic. Such a principle of conductivity has been the focus of NDT theory since the 1970’s whereas consensus thinking has been focused on intentional states. Recently research efforts have made progress in regards to divining a rule based logic, yet it still adheres to intentional states (such as seeking to control access to resources) to explain complex behavior.
