autonomy v. automaticity (Evolution)

by dhw, Saturday, February 17, 2018, 12:08 (2469 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: There is obvious improvement within any drive for complexity. Complexity explains the arrival of the unexpected (human brains) and unreasonable (whales), which you ignore. Complexity has purpose, the human brain, and no sense, the whales. You are cherry picking my comments.

dhw: I have never ignored the complexity of whales, and am continually disputing what you claim to be its unreasonableness. There is nothing unreasonable about an animal changing its environment in order to improve its chances of survival, and then stage by stage adapting itself to the new conditions. You simply refuse to countenance that reasoning because you are fixed in your belief that your God transformed the pre-whale in advance of its entering the water, and so the different stages make no sense to you (= “unreasonable”).

DAVID: And it makes no sense to me to assume that each stage (which are giant gaps in form and function)in whale evolution occurred by chance or by committees of whale cells working out the complex designs of the new forms on their own. Only God fits and I am 'fixed' there.

But you have missed the point. You find whale evolution unreasonable. It doesn’t fit into your anthropocentric, God-controls-it-all, complexity-for-complexity’s sake hypothesis. Nor, let’s face it, do a million other innovations, lifestyles and natural wonders. Chance is a straw man in our discussions, since you know I am equally sceptical. “God fits” is not the opposite of what you call “cell committees”, since I have always allowed for God as the originator of cellular intelligence. You have agreed that what does NOT fit is your interpretation of your God’s motives and methods. If you yourself can find no sense in it, perhaps you should consider a different interpretation.