Intelligence & Evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Friday, November 22, 2013, 17:52 (3806 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

dhw: David, however, insists that cells are automatons, and so whatever innovations they have come up with can only have been preprogrammed by his god. Our difference is therefore not really one of definition at all. It is David's insistence that cells are automatons, and that divine preprogramming is the only explanation for innovations.
DAVID: Agreed.
TONY: David defines them [cells] at the stage that I labeled aware, which is, the ability to detect and act upon things outside of yourself, but not possessing any form of self-identity or the identity of others beyond a purely mechanical state. 
DHW is defining them at the stage that I labeled them at the stage of self-conscious, which is, they are able to reason and plan for the future, which requires abstract thought as well as the awareness of identity of both themselves and others.-Welcome back, Tony. I'm afraid you've missed a great deal of this exchange. David insists that cells/cell communities are automatons descended from automatons descended from automatons etc. that were preprogrammed by his God from the very beginning to produce every possible innovation, adaptation, strategy and lifestyle (his version of theistic evolution) ... unless God intervened personally to make changes (= Creationism). He denies them any awareness. I say they have awareness, the ability to communicate, to cooperate, to process information, and to take decisions. But they are NOT self-aware.-TONY: The ability to learn, remember, recall, communicate, reason, plan, and apply are all far far beyond the scope of simple intelligence.-But according to some scientists (Margulis, Albrecht-Buehler, and others I have cited) who have studied the behaviour of bacteria, they do have the abilities I have listed. "Reason" and "plan" are too close to what you call "abstract thinking", but these single cells appear (I can't be dogmatic) to be able to work out for themselves how to adapt to or exploit any number of conditions. From that, I extrapolate the possibility that evolution got underway when the first cells combined to create multicellularity, and from then on cell communities pooled what I call their "intelligence" to create ever more complex organisms. Every organ is a cooperative cellular community which also cooperates with other cell communities within the same body. No, the "intelligent cell" is not a human being, but it is not an automaton. Put single cells together into vast communities, and what "emerges" (emergence being the theory that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts) is an intelligence ultimately extending to the human mind. I have used ants as an analogy to the simpler communities, but I don't want to repeat all the arguments here.-TONY: In David's view on the other hand, the complexity is not much greater than things we are already able to accomplish with fairly basic computer programs. Define a set of tasks, states, parameters, and variables, and then give the instructs as to how to handle them.-Yes, this is a good parallel to David's hypothesis. But the only way it can fit in with the vast spread of the evolutionary bush is if God put the instructions into the FIRST CELLS, providing billions and billions of programmes to be handed down through billions of generations to provide automatic responses to billions of different environments and situations. His alternative is constant intervention. My suggestion is that if God exists, he has provided cells with the "intelligence" to work out their own way of dealing with the billions of environments, challenges and situations that have confronted them throughout the history of life on Earth. Each innovation/ adaptation represents an individual decision by cell communities, thus leading to the colossal variety of life and lifestyles this planet has worked its way through. Do you really believe a fairly basic computer programme inserted into the first living cells could have accomplished this?