Animal Minds; how much can we learn about them? (Animals)

by David Turell , Wednesday, December 16, 2015, 00:26 (3264 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: You've neatly sidestepped the issue of "was it built in stages or all at once?" My highly pertinent questions lead to a logical conclusion: it had to be planned in advance.
> 
> How on earth do you expect me to know if it was built in stages? However, a nest is not like an organ, which either functions or doesn't. For all we know, the complexities may well have been added in stages, and as Matt has suggested, generations may have learned by observation.
Unless you look at the pictures of the knots you will not fully understand the point of my rhetorical question. Is half a nest functional? And this is a very complex nest. And the little weavers looked on and learned. Not reasonable.-> dhw: Meanwhile, you have not so neatly sidestepped the question I asked you, in response to your point that such a complex nest was unnecessary. Why would your God create such an unnecessarily complex nest when his aim was to produce humans? -I've told you, I don't know, but I'm sure the nest was designed by God.
 
> dhw: You have not made the connection. You have asked why weaverbirds build such unnecessarily complex nests and why plovers fly such vast distances, and you insist that God made them do it. So I look forward to hearing why you think your God made them do such unnecessary things.-I have no idea why He had them do these complex things and lifestyles, but I cannot see how the animals learned to do it by themselves. total difference in viewpoint.-> 
> dhw: It is possible that the drive to complexity came from your God. I have even given you two alternative theistic hypotheses that allow a special place for humans.... Please note, this part of our discussion is devoted to your personal reading of God's mind, not to God's existence. -I'm where I am because I cannot explain the unnecessary arrival of humans any other way of theorizing..-> 
>dhw: How does that justify dismissing the conclusions of such respected scientists as “absolutely wrong”? Why not stick to the 50/50 you agreed to in the past?-50/50 are the reasonable odds since there are only two choices, but the studies I read lead me to 90/10 controlled by onboard information. This is instructional information which allows the protein molecules to function cooperatively to create life. Each protein is not alive. the complex is following instructions.