Wayne Wynn wrote:
> It seems to me that this sentence mixes different meanings of 
> "evolution". Just because we have acquired knowledge and skills does 
> not mean we have "evolved" in the sense I think it is used on this 
> list. The neurological aspects of newborns may have evolved since 
> paleolithic times, but we are not able to determine that.
>
>
> Adam Sroka wrote:
> ...
> We are far less constrained by our surroundings than other beings that 
> we are aware of, because the evolution of linguistic "software" has 
> enabled us to evolve faster than we could possibly evolve in "hardware."
> ....
>
>
> .
>
Yes. I am using both the dictionary and the biological definition of 
"evolution" with respect to the software metaphor. However, it is 
possible that changes in linguistics and the related changes in brain 
structure have a genetic component. It is a chicken-and-egg problem that 
we don't know all the answers to. Certainly we first had to evolve 
biologically to be able to use language and then later, as a result, we 
are able to adapt mentally - in "software" - more quickly than we can 
adapt physically. This "thought adaptation" is evolution in the 
dictionary sense, but not evolution in the biological sense.

The metaphor is still striking. Once application specific circuits 
"evolved" into computers the ability to "adapt" to various uses became 
so rapid that it enabled all the technology we now take for granted.