Teleology & evolution: Stephen Talbott's take (Introduction)

by David Turell , Thursday, June 09, 2016, 22:38 (3089 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: 'Apparently automatic' behaviour of organs is not 'apparently'; it is absolutely automatic in our bodies.
> 
> dhw: The invention of the organ clearly cannot have been automatic unless you wish to return to your earlier hypothesis that all innovations are preprogrammed or the result of divine dabbling (which you admit is less compatible with the bush of life). If the cellular communities possess an autonomous inventive mechanism that enables them to design a new organ, we can hardly expect this form of intelligence to disappear, and so it is quite logical that the same intelligence will also apply itself when there are new problems to solve. Otherwise, it will repeat the behaviour that has enabled the new organ to function, which it will do automatically until the next problem arises. -Where we continue to have a wide gulf of understanding is my point that complex organs that currently exist in even the least advanced animals with organ systems, require exquisite planning to create. Darwin tiny steps are not seen in the fossil record. Therefore these organs are saltations, and the result of very complex mentation, not available in cell communities. All we are aware of currently are minor epigenetic adaptations.