Quote (kayeto @ 4 Sep 2013 01:14)
Ok let's say your statement is true.
When we ask the question "Why do organisms on Earth have the traits they have?" the answer according to Darwin's model was that those traits are the result of natural selection and the evolutionary process. Now, if we are saying that some traits (such as dreaming) are not the result of natural selection, then that means Darwin's model is an incomplete answer to the question. The new answer would be "Organisms on Earth have the traits they have either because the trait conveyed an evolutionary benefit OR for no reason at all".
You agree with me on this? If organisms have things that offered no evolutionary benefit, then we have to consider that possibility for any trait we examine in any organism (rather than claiming that life forms are the way they are because of evolution), right?
Ok I am on a really big streak of reading entire threads, but unfortunately I'm stopping here, so I hope I dont say something thats been said already.
Read on exaptations. I just posted about this in the thread about finger prune. Not every trait has been developed for the sole purposed of its function, and some will argue that indeed, this possibility HAS to be considered for every trait, and doing otherwise is a huge paradigm in evolutionary biology. Darwin would probably argue that on the long term, every exaptation becomes an adaptation, being the result of natural selection. Admitting that there is such a thing as a trait that randomly starts to develop does not falsify Darwin's theory in no mean.