"

You contrive artificial difference between information and knowledge and then use it to argue that relating biological sharing is obscuring in this context. That is obscuration. Categorical declaration of synonyms mean different things is obscuration. Saying ""it is obscuring at best"" implies the worse thing, vandalism at worst. The ""culture"" means that we evolve something by sharing ideas/information/solutions/knowledge/good features. Same happens in the biology. That is what I am saying. Sexual recombination (of best parents) in biology = simple communication in our knowledge sphere. We, human, have got the neural network and speech  another evolutionary mechanism, which can evolve (improve the culture) separately from biology (the genes). In the neural sphere you evolve pure ideas. You produce a better idea by combining your concepts with solutions discovered by other entities. You share the ideas for improving your culture. This is exactly what sex does in biology. I do not claim any sociobiology concept or any other disputable theory. I link undoubtful clearly related concept. But it defenitely confirmed/exploited by the bioinformatics. Saying that ""mechanisms of knowledge transfer in these two spheres have nothing in common"" and ""relating them is obscuring"" is unacceptable.   "