An inventive mechanism; Read this essay (Evolution)

by David Turell , Monday, October 06, 2014, 23:43 (3483 days ago) @ dhw
edited by dhw, Tuesday, October 07, 2014, 16:21


> dhw: Once again, thank you for recommending an illuminating article, especially since it supports so many ideas you disagree with.-You have missed the point,as always, as to why I present this material. It is not magnanimously to help you. ;>)) I find it by following ID folks who interpret it as I do, not as the author does. He is committed to a materialistic and naturalistic interpretation. We are not. His is an atheist or agnostic view of these findings.
> 
> dhw: No divine preprogramming, and no dabbling/tinkering, but something working from within. He calls it the “logos informing all things”. The panpsychist hypothesis asserts that all things have a mental or inner aspect, with varying degrees of subjectivity and quasi-consciousness. Of course it still depends on an “if”, and none of this means that Talbott knows more than you, but you have recommended his article. And so perhaps you will find my own less dogmatic but not dissimilar musings a little more convincing in the light of the above.-Of course, no divine preprogramming, but his point of view and yours mimic each other, so of course you feel supported, and I think his findings can be interpreted as supporting mine.-How? First of all I look more than genome/cell relationships. I don't accept chance as having any possibility of creating such an intricate genome and genome/cellular dance. It is all way too complex for chance. And that is exactly what his essay shows in my mind and with the ID folks. Secondly, I am very aware of the plasticity of the DNA, which starts out as a zygote with a single code and in order to make various organs, which cooperate together, and is modified by its own plasticity to make 'kidney' DNA or 'liver' DNA, or most spectacularly 'brain neuron' DNA. Even the myocardium and skeletal muscles are very differentiated as to structure and metabolites used for energy. This ability of DNA must be very useful in speciation, however it occurs. Therefore, I accept that there is an intense interplay between genome and cells as Talbott describes. The genome does not receive sensory input directly, but through the cells tht make up the organism. This is the ultimate feedback mechanism leading to speciation, if it occurs through an IM. Remember that life is built on simple feedbacks covering levels of product output, temperature control, etc. Speciation is the most complex of all feedbacks, if it occurs by IM.-Note that I have given cells lots of credit in consideration of a speciation mechanism. But I will not give up the knowledge that they are tighly controlled by the genome. They automatically ferry information to the genome, and as with any architectural process, past experience must be employed in setting up modified plans for a new structure. Therefore, the requirement for continuity and guidelines in the genome. After all it is changes in the genome that produces the modified organism. The genome modifies how the cells are newly employed in the new structures. The genome is the final arbiter. Simply, the cells supply information and the genome creates.