More Denton: Reply to Tony (Introduction)

by dhw, Wednesday, August 12, 2015, 19:20 (3391 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

Dhw: You have summed up the problem very aptly: “To answer DHW's question about possibilities is likely impossible, due to my own ignorance. How many behaviors does a dog have? How many behaviors does a bird have?” Within the limits of what each organism can do and what the environment will allow each organism to do (a fish can't swim if there is no water), the possibilities would seem to be almost endless. -TONY: Actually, you bring up an important point here that I think adds more constraints than you might initially suspect. I think the environment adds fairly significant constraints that dramatically reduces the number of programs required, because all un-programmed for behaviors and un-programmed for environmental scenarios end in death. When we look at nature, this is in fact what we see. Fish out of water dies. Fish too deep dies [...]-You seem to be suggesting that all survivors have been preprogrammed, whereas all non-survivors have not. David will be pleased, though his convoluted scenario will now have to include God preprogramming the very first cells to pass on instructions as to how, after billions of years, some of their fishy descendants will survive environmental changes (also preprogrammed?) while others will not. When I asked you about the extent of preprogramming, dabbling and organisms' ability to “work things out for themselves”, you said we didn't understand “the process or the mechanism so a definitive statement is premature”. Are you now making a definitive statement that God preprogrammed the prototype fish (and other prototypes)so that their descendants would adapt or not adapt to environmental changes (also preprogrammed?), or do you think it possible that they inherited the ability to work things out for themselves - or not, as the case may be - as you did with nests, and symbiotic and other lifestyles?
 
DHW: ... in David's scenario, all possibilities have been preprogrammed in the first cells... (or God “steps in”)... You are rather more cagey in your musings about how much is preprogrammed, and this can only mean that you are prepared to accept the possibility that (theistic version) God gave cells/cell communities the wherewithal to work out their own “behaviours” which, if successful, will then be handed down.-TONY: Err, no. Nice try though. You try to give me the option of Darwinian Evolution or your Intelligent Cell theory as if those were the only two choices. Special creation, even in the limited prototype fashion that I view it, is still a possibility and still consistent with the evidence. Your hangups regarding it seem to be about why God would create something that would die out (extinction events)which is something that I have covered previously and in more depth in other conversations.-Sorry, but this is a complete misunderstanding. The focus of the current discussion is on whether you agree with David's belief that all the variations/lifestyles/nests have been preprogrammed, or you accept the possibility that organisms can work things out for themselves. Throughout the discussion I have worn my theistic hat, and agreed that their intelligence was designed by God, and it makes no difference whether he planted it in David's first cells or in your prototypes. (Extinction can be explained simply by some organisms being more intelligent/inventive/adaptable than others.)