Cambrian Explosion: mutation rate (Introduction)

by David Turell , Saturday, September 21, 2013, 16:05 (4060 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: My problem with discussing cell activity is you don't understand the biochemistry.
> 
> dhw: You may understand the biochemistry of cells, but do you understand the nature and source of conscious intelligence? ....... However, if you believe that biochemistry is the sole source of intelligence, you will have to accept that your knowledge of biochemistry doesn't encompass it, and you will also have to reconsider your beliefs about free will, psychic experiences, and especially an afterlife.-I view this as a straw man switch. Biochemistry at a simple level is automatic responses of giant molecules to chemical stimuli. What I believe is the case is there is intelligent information and instruction in DNA which the cells can source to handle any changes/challenges that may arise. Don't try to equate this level of function with consciousness, free will, afterlife, etc. 
> 
> dhw: See above for biochemistry. Most forms of panpsychism are theistic. You yourself believe your intelligent God is within and without everything, which means he's within every cell. That is a form of panpsychism. -I'll agree to that description, but I have always supported the idea of pre-planning and pre-programming, which means the cells are automatic responders, and I presume their response follows a plan of limited alternatives; i.e., try this or that to see what will work best.-> 
> DAVID: [as relatively automatic responses to their stresses or other changes. > 
> dhw: "Relatively" is a flexible term. Relatively to what?-Explained above 
> 
> dhw: Innovations are the exception to the rule ... most of the time, organisms remain the same, and the cell communities don't change their behaviour. My suggestion is that mutations were not random ... i.e. chance did not invent the kidney ... but that the invention of the kidney marks an intelligent, non-automatic response by cell communities to changes in the environment.-Thank you for forcing me th sharpen my way of explaining. There is no way for cells independently to create a kidney. They have to be provided with an overall plan to follow. They are given this in my concept of pre-programming. Again, cells contain intelligence but are not themselves intelligent in that they cannot conujure up new information necessary for advances in complexity. Cells do not think in any sense of the word, and your theory implies thinking cells.-> 
> dhw: How can information be used for innovation without the user being possessed of intelligence?-The cells use it automatically-
> dhw; I have no idea what mental processes are like at any level of existence other than our own. Like you, "I am trying to follow the philosophic approach of 'theory to the best explanation' for what we see." I suggest that the intelligent cell theory (whether God designed it or not) explains all the mysteries of evolution, but "it is an extrapolation to best explanation, with no basis of proof."-And all I am doing is agreeing with you that the intelligent cell automatically uses implanted intelligent information and may follow automatic choices a,b, or c. this allows for variation and some degree of natural selection. I still champion theistic evolution.
> 
> dhw: Under "Review: Darwin's Doubt", I gave you four options to choose from, as explanations of the Cambrian innovations. You chose 2: God designing the intelligent mechanism that designed every new organ..... And you have agreed that your God invented cells in such a way that they were capable of independent invention, but you do not agree that they are capable of independent invention because they were preprogrammed to come up with every invention. -I understand I have confused you. I have explained above, and your final thought is what I believe. My 'choices' for cells is what creates variation and some degree of trial and error, with God watching the result. I am am theist not a deist. Pre-programming sounds like deism, but not under my theory.-Review my next note on origin of life, initial cell complexity. Cells described in the article can evolve.