Behe on Shapiro: do these systems have a source? (Introduction)

by David Turell , Tuesday, March 19, 2019, 21:53 (2077 days ago) @ David Turell

Behe obviously is an ID advocate but he quotes Shapiro in a most direct way that unearths Shapiro's own doubts:

Behe’s chapter five is named, “Overextended”, and covers all the weird theories invented by Darwin- supporting scientists trying to cover over all of the inconsistencies that have appeared as science has studied evolution. He and I agree Shapiro has done excellent work, while disagreeing about interpretations. These are some of his comments about Shapiro:

Scientists to do their research by manipulating living genetic material. “Shapiro asks: if we can use those tools to engineer DNA, then why then can’t the cell use them both to meet current challenges and to evolve over time?”

Behe lists all the mechanisms the cells can use to function. “Genetic programs and information can be reused and repurposed…..All those abilities are used during the lives of cells, and all are controlled by them. [This] leads Shapiro to view it as sentient. It acts purposefully toward its environment, so perhaps the cell can also direct its capacities purposely to direct its own evolution. To many Neo-Darwinists such talk carries a whiff of heresy. [Shapiro’s answer is] that their role is open to experimental testing.”

Behe‘s objection to Shapiro’s natural genetic engineering “is that it doesn’t even try to explain the origin of purposeful systems—it takes them for granted…..So, where did the original intricate, complex systems come from? Natural genetic engineering seems to have a big chicken and egg problem---it needs complex systems to make complex systems.

There is little evidence that the systems Shapiro cites are in any way creative beyond the boundaries of their current capacities. Laboratory and field evolution studies give no hint that, in the face of selective pressure, natural genetic systems engineer anything new. Shapiro correctly notes that, “As many biologists have argued since the nineteenth century, random changes would overwhelmingly tend to degrade intricately organized system rather than adapt them to new functions.” (Evolution, page 134) Yet the marvelous cellular systems he cites give every indication that they do the same thing when they move beyond their well-regulated limits.

Comment: No support for cell committees. Even Shapiro expresses doubt in the bold above.