Curious Christian

Reflections on culture, nature, and spirituality from a Christian perspective

This week, I read an intriguing article in New Scientist discussing new research that shifts our understanding of speciation and adaptation. The study suggests that “adaptation follows as a consequence of speciation, rather than contributing as a cause.” In other words, species diversification might be more frequently triggered by sudden, rare events—like climate changes or geographic isolation—than by the gradual accumulation of adaptive traits. According to this view, species are often “pushed” toward diversification by external barriers rather than “pulled” by the slow draw of new ecological niches.

This gets me thinking—not just for debates the origin of species, but also for understanding cultural and ideological evolution in the digital age. Take, for example, the way ideas spread and mutate within online Christian communities. While the internet is often seen as a unifying force, it may also drive division by connecting different groups at different rates, creating pockets of “reproductive isolation” for ideas. Just as species can diverge in isolation, so can beliefs and ideologies.

Generational divides are sometimes seen as more significant than geographical ones today, with age gaps increasingly replacing spatial gaps as the defining lines in cultural divergence. If this trend holds, other factors—such as education level, personality type, time zones, work schedules, internet bandwidth, and web censorship—could also play a role in separating communities online. Where these factors align, we see evidence of “web Balkanization”: isolated groups with limited ideological cross-pollination.

The pace of technological change and varying rates of adoption suggest that as the world speeds up, slow and fast communities will continue to diverge, developing distinct cultural landscapes. The question becomes: how might these divisions impact your own community?

3 responses to “Isolation in the Internet Era: Potential For ‘Speciation’ Of Ideas and Beliefs”

  1. Steve Hayes Avatar

    Not to mention the proliferation of things like Facebook groups on very similar topics. You want to discuss something with A, B and C, but A is in group Z, B is in group Y, and C is in group X.

    Like

  2. Kalessin Avatar
    Kalessin

    Hi Matt — The article may have described something new, but your summary of it doesn’t do so. It has been a truism for at least 80 years that no mutation is prescient of it’s consequences (unless it’s a special intervention by God, who would be the only possible source of prescience). Though a staple of nature documentaries, any statement that “species X developed quality Y *in order to* surmount challenge Z…” is an anthropomorphisization of an impersonal process, and thus simply confused. Speciation is just a mutation with the inability to breed back into the original species, and the same applies. Stephen Jay Gould vs. Richard Dawkins on ‘Hopeful Monsters’ is useful in this respect.

    Like

  3. Andrew Park Avatar
    Andrew Park

    Howzabout all putting this stuff in layman’s terms? The above comments are extremely technical.
    Gene and stem cell manipulation could also be interpreted form of selective breeding and therefore lead to new species variations and mutations?
    In the area of plant grafting and other common types of agricultural processing – e.g. genetic engineering -new species variations are constantly being `born’.

    Like

Leave a reply to Kalessin Cancel reply