Explaining natural wonders (Animals)

by dhw, Friday, May 05, 2017, 12:33 (2758 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Although intelligent behaviour can be argued as under biological controls, we fully appear to have free will, and can change course intentionally on a dime.

dhw: If what "appears" to be intelligent behaviour can be understood as automatic responses “from the outside of the organisms”, what "appears" to be free will may not be free will as understood "from the outside of the organisms". Bacteria can change course on a dime. Since their course-changing enables them to solve problems, what makes you think it’s not intentional?

DAVID: I can explain to you what I intend to do and do it. I can change course and explain to you why I did it. that sows free will. As for bacteria, they can't tell us anything and can be fully automatic in their responses. We are truly outside in their case, but I've taken you inside in our case.

You are able to get “inside” yourself, but you are not able to get “inside” me let alone “inside” bacteria. You and I can communicate, but bacteria also communicate, and we know that they can and do change course. They may well “explain” to one another what they are going to do, though they won't analyse it like humans, because they are – in my view as in yours – highly unlikely to be as self-aware as we are. In any case, the fact that you can explain why you do something does not mean that your explanation is correct. You may THINK you know, but there may be causes you are unaware of. That is the whole basis of determinism. Of course bacteria can’t tell US anything, any more than we can tell THEM anything. We can also “be fully automatic” in our responses, and indeed much of the time we are. But when we have to take decisions, we think our responses are not automatic, so why assume that THEIR decisions are automatic, especially bearing in mind that many of them die before they solve new problems? In short, every point you make about bacteria can be applied to humans.