Biological complexity: homeostasis (Introduction)

by David Turell , Friday, October 26, 2018, 15:11 (2220 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: Your thinking is stuck on the concept of a single "designing mind”. I agree that the complexity demands intelligence.

DAVID: Intelligence implies the ability to plan and design, being able to view future needs theoretically. Cells can't do this, but they can be designed to act intelligently, which is exactly what we see, nothing more.

dhw: Intelligence does NOT imply the ability to view future needs theoretically! You keep giving us examples of organisms solving problems (think of the corvids). Human intelligence – vastly superior to that of our fellow animals – can theorize about the future, but other life forms RESPOND intelligently to changing conditions. Hence adaptation, problem-solving, decision-making. You are “stuck” not only on the concept of a single designing mind, but on an astonishingly narrow view of what constitutes intelligence. But to anticipate your stock reply, I agree that we do not know whether cellular intelligence can extend so far as to innovate, which is why my hypothesis is a hypothesis.

You didn't note I was responding to a single concept of intelligence, specifically the ability to foresee future needs and thus design. The remainder of your comment is fine.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

DAVID: Back to humanizing God as being bored.

dhw: Back to your purposeful God whose possible purpose we mustn’t discuss, although he is like us but is not like us.

DAVID: The problem is He is not as human as you would like to propose.

dhw: And may I ask how you know this?

DAVID: I could ask you the same question: how do you know God has a human side?

dhw: I don’t even know if your God exists, but since you make great play of his purposefulness, I keep asking you what that purpose might be. You have offered several “human” purposes (a relationship with us, our recognition of his work, getting us to puzzle out how he did it, and even the pleasure of creation), and you have acknowledged many times that he may well be like us – i.e. have a human side. However, although he may well have a human side, when I offer a different HYPOTHESIS (not a statement of knowledge) from your own, you state that “He is not as human as you propose.” How do you know the degree of his humanity?

Back and forth we go: none of us can know his degree of humanity, if any. And that includes guesses at purpose. Just look at what He has created and be thankful. Dayenu. Overanalysis and sought for proofs lead to the picket fence.