"If someone were to propose that the planets go around the sun because all planet matter has a kind of tendency for movement, a kind of motility, let us call it an 'oomph', this theory could explain a number of other phenomena as well. So this is a good theory, is it not? No. It is nowhere near as good as the proposition that the planets move around the sun under the influence of a central force which varies exactly inversely as the square of the distance from the center. The second theory is better because it is so specific; it is so obviously unlikely to be the result of chance. It is so definite that the barest error in the movement can show that it is wrong; but the planets could wobble all over the place, and, according to the first theory, you could say, 'Well, that is the funny behavior of the "oomph".'"The "universal mind field" only "explains" things because you can attribute any properties to it you choose to imagine. Fairies would be equally useful as an explanatory mechanism.( Richard Feynmann, "The Meaning of It All", New York: Perseus Press, 1999, pp. 19-20. )
No way to argue with the great Feynmann regarding this remark. But please note it pertains to the movements of physical bodies. We are speaking of animate systems, i.e., living systems. They do not move like physical bodies. A chief difference is they can modify their behavior, change their paths. Physical bodies do not self-initiate their motions, they do not "intend" their own behavior. Their motions turn out to be those predicted by the physical laws.
Indeed, Ichneumon, this distinction is essential, and what largely motivated the writing of this piece.
I want to repeat it:
"Ommph -- the funny behaviour! Is that well said? You could theorize it in the first place. "D'accord. I'll plan it to wobble over." The wrong show, bared arses in movement. Definitely it! Chance results to be unlikely, obviouslty, so specify better because secondary center squares are distant. In verse exact variances force central influences. Understand? Round moves planned that proposed as good as near nowhere. On ton the ryes this is well. Ooomph, and it calls us. More 'til kind! Move ten, Dennis, kindly! Hazmat or play net. All causes be sunny. Gerund stun lap -- that porpoise wears someone. -- Fey"Time!
Another draft, barkeep!
There are many ways to weave a cohesive and functionable narrative. Lord Kelvin was wrong to insist on numbers for Hook did it with verse and cypher.
A few years later over in France another man did it with a loom, and his flowers so loomed spawned an evolution of ideas that today are King of all the methods.
Yes there is evolution. Ideas evolve and designers incorporate them.