autonomy v. automaticity (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Saturday, January 27, 2018, 00:35 (266 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: If it fits your theory perfectly that God gave organisms the means to work out their own solutions, as opposed to preprogramming all the solutions himself, I doubt if there is an English-speaker in the whole wide world who would interpret that as meaning you believe in preprogramming.

DAVID: I said my usual preprogrammed IM, which acts in the present, not 3.8 billion years ago programming.

dhw: Of course intelligence acts in the present. It is present in the organism, enabling it to solve its problems, except when it fails to do so and the organism dies! Your alternatives have always been direct dabbling or a 3.8-billion-year-old programme for every innovation, lifestyle and natural wonder passed down by the first cells to every organism that ever existed. If you now recognize how much more logical it would be that what was passed down was the autonomous God-given (theistic version) ability (IM) to work out solutions as and when problems arise, then hallelujah! If, however, you now wish to withdraw your historic agreement to my hypothesis and go back to your old beliefs - preprogramming or dabbling - then please say so, and we'll move on.

DAVID: I've always accepted an onboard IM with God's guidelines could help an organism solve problems without 3.8 byo preprogramming. Our disagreement is you want it totally autonomous and I insist on God's guidelines, making it semiautonomous.

dhw: We have discussed this many times before, and we have always ended up with you telling me that the onboard IM is God’s instructions (= no autonomy). Your two divine methods are preprogramming and dabbling. Here is a concrete example: do you think your God preprogrammed the first living cells to pass on instructions for the building of the weaverbird’s nest (no autonomy)? Or do you think he stood by the weaverbird giving it instructions/guidelines (no autonomy). Please tell us as clearly as you can which half of the weaverbird’s building you think was autonomous, and what form you think your God’s guidelines take.

I have no idea which is correct, which is why I have preprogramming from the beginning and dabbling as equally probable. And I have always prefered an IM as under guidelines, if an IM is actually present, but we have no proof of it. It would seem the nest was dabbled as the best expectation.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum