Natures wonders: ant rafts and towers (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, July 25, 2017, 13:43 (2676 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

dhw: According to my hypothesis, they [humans, dogs, fish, birds, ants] are all the result of different cell communities working out their own paths, through different degrees and also different forms of intelligence. An ant thinks like an ant and not like an eagle or a human, though all are composed of cell communities that have taken on different forms. This idea does not in any way exclude the existence of your God as the source of cellular intelligence, just as Darwin’s theory allows for the existence of God as the inventor of the whole process of evolution.

TONY: This, of course, is also unprovable. Where are the failed experiments? Where are the failed attempts at increased complexity that should be in the record? And, for the record, I am referring to non-anatomical complexity. Crude attempts at art? A slow but steady progression from simpler tools to more complex? A slow progression of hunting techniques for apex predators that show their intelligence has 'evolved' over time. This is just Darwinism repackaged and sold as a psychological argument.

Yes, all hypotheses concerning origins are unprovable, but increased complexity is very much on the record, unless you think that bacteria, trilobites and humans came into existence at the same time. Crude attempts at art and progression from simpler tools to more complex are also on the record (though “slow but steady” is a bit misleading: one would not expect to find half a non-painting or half a non-functioning spear). Hunting techniques have clearly progressed from spears to bows and arrows to rifles. Or are you asking why our fellow animals did not come up with these ideas? I can only repeat that there are different forms and different degrees of intelligence, but many predators have been around far longer than we have, and their hunting techniques have worked perfectly well. No need for improvement, and in any case they don’t have the intelligence to imagine weaponry beyond the most rudimentary of tools. I accept that humans, with their enhanced intelligence, are vastly different from all other organisms, but I’m struggling to understand what point you are trying to make here. I know you don’t believe in evolution, though many theists do, but I don’t understand how it’s disproved by the argument that we have not found evidence of failed non-anatomical experiments. I believe in Darwin’s theory of common descent, but not in his random mutations or gradualism, which is why I offer cellular intelligence as the driving force behind life’s great variety. Again I’m struggling to understand what you mean by this being “a psychological argument” (and why that matters). I’m sure we both agree that the complexities of living forms seem to provide evidence of intelligent design, so why is the intelligence of cells more “psychological” than the intelligence of your God (who may have designed the intelligence of cells)? My apologies if I’m missing something obvious, but I’m sure you will explain what that is.