What is a synonym of the word design that can be used in context of evolution?
For example let's take two sentences; "engineer made a design for camera", "evolution made an X for eye". What is the best X that could be used?
I need it for an essay about evolution.
evolution terminology
edited Dec 20 at 9:18
WYSIWYG♦
30.3k747126
asked Dec 19 at 22:11
Faber
233
New contributor
Faber is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
For example let's take two sentences; "engineer made a design for camera", "evolution made an X for eye". What is the best X that could be used?
I need it for an essay about evolution.
evolution terminology
edited Dec 20 at 9:18
WYSIWYG♦
30.3k747126
asked Dec 19 at 22:11
Faber
233
New contributor
Faber is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
4
If not already very clear in Bryan's answer...Evolution made Xis pretty much never a good phrasing. Instead, sayX has evolved. Otherwise, it feels like evolution is a thinking individual with a goal in mind (which would be very wrong). Similarly, don't say,X has been designedbutX is an adaptation(assuming X is indeed an adaptation for whatever X stands for).
– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:34
add a comment |
For example let's take two sentences; "engineer made a design for camera", "evolution made an X for eye". What is the best X that could be used?
I need it for an essay about evolution.
evolution terminology
edited Dec 20 at 9:18
WYSIWYG♦
30.3k747126
asked Dec 19 at 22:11
Faber
233
New contributor
Faber is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
For example let's take two sentences; "engineer made a design for camera", "evolution made an X for eye". What is the best X that could be used?
I need it for an essay about evolution.
evolution terminology
evolution terminology
edited Dec 20 at 9:18
WYSIWYG♦
30.3k747126
asked Dec 19 at 22:11
Faber
233
New contributor
Faber is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited Dec 20 at 9:18
WYSIWYG♦
30.3k747126
asked Dec 19 at 22:11
Faber
233
New contributor
Faber is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited Dec 20 at 9:18
WYSIWYG♦
30.3k747126
edited Dec 20 at 9:18
WYSIWYG♦
30.3k747126
edited Dec 20 at 9:18
WYSIWYG♦
30.3k747126
30.3k747126
asked Dec 19 at 22:11
Faber
233
New contributor
Faber is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Dec 19 at 22:11
Faber
233
asked Dec 19 at 22:11
Faber
233
233
New contributor
Faber is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Faber is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Faber is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
4
If not already very clear in Bryan's answer...Evolution made Xis pretty much never a good phrasing. Instead, sayX has evolved. Otherwise, it feels like evolution is a thinking individual with a goal in mind (which would be very wrong). Similarly, don't say,X has been designedbutX is an adaptation(assuming X is indeed an adaptation for whatever X stands for).
– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:34
add a comment |
4
If not already very clear in Bryan's answer...Evolution made Xis pretty much never a good phrasing. Instead, sayX has evolved. Otherwise, it feels like evolution is a thinking individual with a goal in mind (which would be very wrong). Similarly, don't say,X has been designedbutX is an adaptation(assuming X is indeed an adaptation for whatever X stands for).
– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:34
4
4
If not already very clear in Bryan's answer...
Evolution made X is pretty much never a good phrasing. Instead, say X has evolved. Otherwise, it feels like evolution is a thinking individual with a goal in mind (which would be very wrong). Similarly, don't say, X has been designed but X is an adaptation (assuming X is indeed an adaptation for whatever X stands for).– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:34
If not already very clear in Bryan's answer...
Evolution made X is pretty much never a good phrasing. Instead, say X has evolved. Otherwise, it feels like evolution is a thinking individual with a goal in mind (which would be very wrong). Similarly, don't say, X has been designed but X is an adaptation (assuming X is indeed an adaptation for whatever X stands for).– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:34
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Although not ideal, "adaptation" is more appropriate than "design" as a noun describing something that has come about in an evolutionary context, even though not all evolution is adaptive.
In writing, though, I would not phrase it as you have, rather I would change the agency from something evolution does as some sort of "entity" which makes it sound like a goal-driven "designer" with whatever words you use, and instead say that "Eyes evolved from simpler photosensitive groups of cells." Eyes deserve the agency, because having eyes is what would improve the survival of an organism versus eyeless conspecifics and increase the proportion of eyed individuals in the next generation (I hope my simplification of the eye-evolving process as if eyes are a simple Mendelian trait isn't too distracting here, I mean it mostly as metaphor), rather than eyes being a "goal" of something called evolution.
Similarly, you would not say "Chemistry makes water from hydrogen and oxygen," rather you would say something like "Hydrogen gas reacts exothermically in the presence of oxygen gas to produce water." There is no agent "chemistry," that is just the word we use to describe the set of processes in the universe that govern how molecules/atoms/subatomic particles interact. Similarly, "evolution" is not an agent who does things.
One place I would differ in this guidance is in talking very big picture, such as saying that "evolution produced the wide variety of species present today"; in that example, there isn't anything more local to act as an agent, and it's appropriate to refer to the evolutionary process as a whole.
answered Dec 19 at 22:55
Bryan Krause
18.2k23150
2
Nice answer that highlights the likely mistaken representation the OP had when trying to find a synonym of design as if the concept would apply. +1
– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:32
@Remi.b Thanks; I'm not sure if OP's representation was mistaken or not, however; I've often seen people who understand evolution very clearly make similar slips, especially when they are assuming their audience will see between the lines and understand what they mean. Sometimes being more correct also means being more verbose, unfortunately.
– Bryan Krause
Dec 19 at 23:35
The closes I can think of is "Shaped" or "Favors". I see that most often when talking about side effects or a suite of features or for comparing alternative constructions. There is no agency any more than erosion has agency if you said "erosion shaped a rock outcrop". You could say "evolution shaped the eye such that ...." A cleaner usage would be "evolution favores eyes with X under Y conditions" I do agree giving agency to the eye is probably cleaner.
– John
Dec 20 at 4:02
add a comment |
How about "strategy"? For example, elephants, giraffes and koalas all need to eat leaves from tall trees, but they have evolved very different strategies to accomplish that goal.
answered Dec 20 at 1:43
Ocie Mitchell
1112
New contributor
Ocie Mitchell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "375"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Faber is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbiology.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f79940%2fwhat-is-a-synonym-of-the-word-design-that-can-be-used-in-context-of-evolution%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Although not ideal, "adaptation" is more appropriate than "design" as a noun describing something that has come about in an evolutionary context, even though not all evolution is adaptive.
In writing, though, I would not phrase it as you have, rather I would change the agency from something evolution does as some sort of "entity" which makes it sound like a goal-driven "designer" with whatever words you use, and instead say that "Eyes evolved from simpler photosensitive groups of cells." Eyes deserve the agency, because having eyes is what would improve the survival of an organism versus eyeless conspecifics and increase the proportion of eyed individuals in the next generation (I hope my simplification of the eye-evolving process as if eyes are a simple Mendelian trait isn't too distracting here, I mean it mostly as metaphor), rather than eyes being a "goal" of something called evolution.
Similarly, you would not say "Chemistry makes water from hydrogen and oxygen," rather you would say something like "Hydrogen gas reacts exothermically in the presence of oxygen gas to produce water." There is no agent "chemistry," that is just the word we use to describe the set of processes in the universe that govern how molecules/atoms/subatomic particles interact. Similarly, "evolution" is not an agent who does things.
One place I would differ in this guidance is in talking very big picture, such as saying that "evolution produced the wide variety of species present today"; in that example, there isn't anything more local to act as an agent, and it's appropriate to refer to the evolutionary process as a whole.
answered Dec 19 at 22:55
Bryan Krause
18.2k23150
2
Nice answer that highlights the likely mistaken representation the OP had when trying to find a synonym of design as if the concept would apply. +1
– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:32
@Remi.b Thanks; I'm not sure if OP's representation was mistaken or not, however; I've often seen people who understand evolution very clearly make similar slips, especially when they are assuming their audience will see between the lines and understand what they mean. Sometimes being more correct also means being more verbose, unfortunately.
– Bryan Krause
Dec 19 at 23:35
The closes I can think of is "Shaped" or "Favors". I see that most often when talking about side effects or a suite of features or for comparing alternative constructions. There is no agency any more than erosion has agency if you said "erosion shaped a rock outcrop". You could say "evolution shaped the eye such that ...." A cleaner usage would be "evolution favores eyes with X under Y conditions" I do agree giving agency to the eye is probably cleaner.
– John
Dec 20 at 4:02
add a comment |
Although not ideal, "adaptation" is more appropriate than "design" as a noun describing something that has come about in an evolutionary context, even though not all evolution is adaptive.
In writing, though, I would not phrase it as you have, rather I would change the agency from something evolution does as some sort of "entity" which makes it sound like a goal-driven "designer" with whatever words you use, and instead say that "Eyes evolved from simpler photosensitive groups of cells." Eyes deserve the agency, because having eyes is what would improve the survival of an organism versus eyeless conspecifics and increase the proportion of eyed individuals in the next generation (I hope my simplification of the eye-evolving process as if eyes are a simple Mendelian trait isn't too distracting here, I mean it mostly as metaphor), rather than eyes being a "goal" of something called evolution.
Similarly, you would not say "Chemistry makes water from hydrogen and oxygen," rather you would say something like "Hydrogen gas reacts exothermically in the presence of oxygen gas to produce water." There is no agent "chemistry," that is just the word we use to describe the set of processes in the universe that govern how molecules/atoms/subatomic particles interact. Similarly, "evolution" is not an agent who does things.
One place I would differ in this guidance is in talking very big picture, such as saying that "evolution produced the wide variety of species present today"; in that example, there isn't anything more local to act as an agent, and it's appropriate to refer to the evolutionary process as a whole.
answered Dec 19 at 22:55
Bryan Krause
18.2k23150
2
Nice answer that highlights the likely mistaken representation the OP had when trying to find a synonym of design as if the concept would apply. +1
– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:32
@Remi.b Thanks; I'm not sure if OP's representation was mistaken or not, however; I've often seen people who understand evolution very clearly make similar slips, especially when they are assuming their audience will see between the lines and understand what they mean. Sometimes being more correct also means being more verbose, unfortunately.
– Bryan Krause
Dec 19 at 23:35
The closes I can think of is "Shaped" or "Favors". I see that most often when talking about side effects or a suite of features or for comparing alternative constructions. There is no agency any more than erosion has agency if you said "erosion shaped a rock outcrop". You could say "evolution shaped the eye such that ...." A cleaner usage would be "evolution favores eyes with X under Y conditions" I do agree giving agency to the eye is probably cleaner.
– John
Dec 20 at 4:02
add a comment |
Although not ideal, "adaptation" is more appropriate than "design" as a noun describing something that has come about in an evolutionary context, even though not all evolution is adaptive.
In writing, though, I would not phrase it as you have, rather I would change the agency from something evolution does as some sort of "entity" which makes it sound like a goal-driven "designer" with whatever words you use, and instead say that "Eyes evolved from simpler photosensitive groups of cells." Eyes deserve the agency, because having eyes is what would improve the survival of an organism versus eyeless conspecifics and increase the proportion of eyed individuals in the next generation (I hope my simplification of the eye-evolving process as if eyes are a simple Mendelian trait isn't too distracting here, I mean it mostly as metaphor), rather than eyes being a "goal" of something called evolution.
Similarly, you would not say "Chemistry makes water from hydrogen and oxygen," rather you would say something like "Hydrogen gas reacts exothermically in the presence of oxygen gas to produce water." There is no agent "chemistry," that is just the word we use to describe the set of processes in the universe that govern how molecules/atoms/subatomic particles interact. Similarly, "evolution" is not an agent who does things.
One place I would differ in this guidance is in talking very big picture, such as saying that "evolution produced the wide variety of species present today"; in that example, there isn't anything more local to act as an agent, and it's appropriate to refer to the evolutionary process as a whole.
answered Dec 19 at 22:55
Bryan Krause
18.2k23150
Although not ideal, "adaptation" is more appropriate than "design" as a noun describing something that has come about in an evolutionary context, even though not all evolution is adaptive.
In writing, though, I would not phrase it as you have, rather I would change the agency from something evolution does as some sort of "entity" which makes it sound like a goal-driven "designer" with whatever words you use, and instead say that "Eyes evolved from simpler photosensitive groups of cells." Eyes deserve the agency, because having eyes is what would improve the survival of an organism versus eyeless conspecifics and increase the proportion of eyed individuals in the next generation (I hope my simplification of the eye-evolving process as if eyes are a simple Mendelian trait isn't too distracting here, I mean it mostly as metaphor), rather than eyes being a "goal" of something called evolution.
Similarly, you would not say "Chemistry makes water from hydrogen and oxygen," rather you would say something like "Hydrogen gas reacts exothermically in the presence of oxygen gas to produce water." There is no agent "chemistry," that is just the word we use to describe the set of processes in the universe that govern how molecules/atoms/subatomic particles interact. Similarly, "evolution" is not an agent who does things.
One place I would differ in this guidance is in talking very big picture, such as saying that "evolution produced the wide variety of species present today"; in that example, there isn't anything more local to act as an agent, and it's appropriate to refer to the evolutionary process as a whole.
answered Dec 19 at 22:55
Bryan Krause
18.2k23150
edited Dec 19 at 23:29
answered Dec 19 at 22:55
Bryan Krause
18.2k23150
answered Dec 19 at 22:55
Bryan Krause
18.2k23150
answered Dec 19 at 22:55
Bryan Krause
18.2k23150
18.2k23150
2
Nice answer that highlights the likely mistaken representation the OP had when trying to find a synonym of design as if the concept would apply. +1
– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:32
@Remi.b Thanks; I'm not sure if OP's representation was mistaken or not, however; I've often seen people who understand evolution very clearly make similar slips, especially when they are assuming their audience will see between the lines and understand what they mean. Sometimes being more correct also means being more verbose, unfortunately.
– Bryan Krause
Dec 19 at 23:35
The closes I can think of is "Shaped" or "Favors". I see that most often when talking about side effects or a suite of features or for comparing alternative constructions. There is no agency any more than erosion has agency if you said "erosion shaped a rock outcrop". You could say "evolution shaped the eye such that ...." A cleaner usage would be "evolution favores eyes with X under Y conditions" I do agree giving agency to the eye is probably cleaner.
– John
Dec 20 at 4:02
add a comment |
2
Nice answer that highlights the likely mistaken representation the OP had when trying to find a synonym of design as if the concept would apply. +1
– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:32
@Remi.b Thanks; I'm not sure if OP's representation was mistaken or not, however; I've often seen people who understand evolution very clearly make similar slips, especially when they are assuming their audience will see between the lines and understand what they mean. Sometimes being more correct also means being more verbose, unfortunately.
– Bryan Krause
Dec 19 at 23:35
The closes I can think of is "Shaped" or "Favors". I see that most often when talking about side effects or a suite of features or for comparing alternative constructions. There is no agency any more than erosion has agency if you said "erosion shaped a rock outcrop". You could say "evolution shaped the eye such that ...." A cleaner usage would be "evolution favores eyes with X under Y conditions" I do agree giving agency to the eye is probably cleaner.
– John
Dec 20 at 4:02
2
2
Nice answer that highlights the likely mistaken representation the OP had when trying to find a synonym of design as if the concept would apply. +1
– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:32
Nice answer that highlights the likely mistaken representation the OP had when trying to find a synonym of design as if the concept would apply. +1
– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:32
@Remi.b Thanks; I'm not sure if OP's representation was mistaken or not, however; I've often seen people who understand evolution very clearly make similar slips, especially when they are assuming their audience will see between the lines and understand what they mean. Sometimes being more correct also means being more verbose, unfortunately.
– Bryan Krause
Dec 19 at 23:35
@Remi.b Thanks; I'm not sure if OP's representation was mistaken or not, however; I've often seen people who understand evolution very clearly make similar slips, especially when they are assuming their audience will see between the lines and understand what they mean. Sometimes being more correct also means being more verbose, unfortunately.
– Bryan Krause
Dec 19 at 23:35
The closes I can think of is "Shaped" or "Favors". I see that most often when talking about side effects or a suite of features or for comparing alternative constructions. There is no agency any more than erosion has agency if you said "erosion shaped a rock outcrop". You could say "evolution shaped the eye such that ...." A cleaner usage would be "evolution favores eyes with X under Y conditions" I do agree giving agency to the eye is probably cleaner.
– John
Dec 20 at 4:02
The closes I can think of is "Shaped" or "Favors". I see that most often when talking about side effects or a suite of features or for comparing alternative constructions. There is no agency any more than erosion has agency if you said "erosion shaped a rock outcrop". You could say "evolution shaped the eye such that ...." A cleaner usage would be "evolution favores eyes with X under Y conditions" I do agree giving agency to the eye is probably cleaner.
– John
Dec 20 at 4:02
add a comment |
How about "strategy"? For example, elephants, giraffes and koalas all need to eat leaves from tall trees, but they have evolved very different strategies to accomplish that goal.
answered Dec 20 at 1:43
Ocie Mitchell
1112
New contributor
Ocie Mitchell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
How about "strategy"? For example, elephants, giraffes and koalas all need to eat leaves from tall trees, but they have evolved very different strategies to accomplish that goal.
answered Dec 20 at 1:43
Ocie Mitchell
1112
New contributor
Ocie Mitchell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
How about "strategy"? For example, elephants, giraffes and koalas all need to eat leaves from tall trees, but they have evolved very different strategies to accomplish that goal.
answered Dec 20 at 1:43
Ocie Mitchell
1112
New contributor
Ocie Mitchell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
How about "strategy"? For example, elephants, giraffes and koalas all need to eat leaves from tall trees, but they have evolved very different strategies to accomplish that goal.
answered Dec 20 at 1:43
Ocie Mitchell
1112
New contributor
Ocie Mitchell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered Dec 20 at 1:43
Ocie Mitchell
1112
New contributor
Ocie Mitchell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered Dec 20 at 1:43
Ocie Mitchell
1112
answered Dec 20 at 1:43
Ocie Mitchell
1112
1112
New contributor
Ocie Mitchell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Ocie Mitchell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Ocie Mitchell is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Faber is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Faber is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Faber is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Faber is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Biology Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbiology.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f79940%2fwhat-is-a-synonym-of-the-word-design-that-can-be-used-in-context-of-evolution%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
4
If not already very clear in Bryan's answer...
Evolution made Xis pretty much never a good phrasing. Instead, sayX has evolved. Otherwise, it feels like evolution is a thinking individual with a goal in mind (which would be very wrong). Similarly, don't say,X has been designedbutX is an adaptation(assuming X is indeed an adaptation for whatever X stands for).– Remi.b
Dec 19 at 23:34