Evolution v Creationism: guided evolution? dhw? (Evolution)

by dhw, Friday, April 10, 2015, 20:22 (3513 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Same old problem: either the one celled act intelligently because they have a degree of it ,or they act intelligently because they are following implicit instructions. No one can tell which.
dhw: If no one knows, why do you keep insisting that they are automatons?-DAVID: Very easy: my choice between the only two possibilities is they respond automatically.-Twice below you have danced away from tricky questions by claiming agnosticism. In this particular case, the somewhat unenlightening reason you have given for your choice is that it is your choice.-dhw: I do not dismiss design or guidance. My problem is your vacillation over the concept of an inventive mechanism (possibly designed by your God) as opposed to preprogramming of the first cells or dabbling. 
DAVID: My vacillation is because I don't know. And picking a choice is not a solution. You should understand that as an agnostic.-Then please stop choosing automatism over autonomy and keep an open mind.-dhw: The whole point of the “inventive mechanism” is that it is inventive, i.e. the hypothesis explains how innovations may have taken place, not how they function once they have proved successful.
DAVID: We have invented an IM, but we don't know if, in fact, it exists, except for the evidence of epigenetic modifications which are responses to challenges, and not necessarily an advance in evolution to more refinement and complexity.-Once again, nobody knows how innovations take place. But we do know that organisms can adapt by changing their structures, so maybe the same mechanism can also innovate. And we have invented a UI, but we don't know if, in fact, it exists. In all cases, we can only deal in hypotheses.-dhw: I would still like to know whether you think your God preprogrammed the first cells with the weaverbird's nest, dabbled, or gave the bird a list of options while at the same time preprogramming its choice.-DAVID: And once again I will assume your role. I am agnostic on the point. I will accept the point that God invented a very clever inventive type of living matter.-I wish I could rely on your acceptance, but tomorrow you will tell us that cells and cell communities are automatons obeying instructions - i.e. the very opposite of clever, inventive types of living matter. I also wish you would acknowledge that the three above choices are your alternatives to an autonomous inventive mechanism, and the first and third are frankly pretty absurd. So too is dabbling at weaverbird-nest level. These are the unlikely-sounding options covered by your “design” and your “guidance”. That is why I keep trying to pin you down, and no doubt why you always avoid giving me a direct answer.