Reality: can science prove God? (General)

by David Turell @, Friday, February 21, 2020, 19:25 (134 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: You should agree design shows foresight. That is our experience in all problem-solving inventions.

dhw: Is it? I thought problem-solving entailed mastering current conditions, not looking into a crystal ball.

DAVID: Did you design your lovely home? Did you counsel with an architect? If so, you and he used aforethought in the design to make it have the new functions and livability you wanted. No crystal ball ever required, just designing brains as usual. No 'mastering' involved, just analysis of current uses and adaptations for changes desired. All requiring mentation.

dhw: I don’t know why you need to complicate the argument with this analogy, but it fits to a small degree, in so far as you do need designing brains to analyse current conditions (though these are new in the context of evolution) and make the changes required. Of course design requires mentation – hence the concept of the intelligent cell/cell community, which analyses the new conditions and either makes the changes required, or goes extinct. “No crystal ball required, just designing brains as usual.” Extension of the process: new conditions may allow for experiments in new forms of behaviour, leading to innovation. Still “no crystal ball required etc.”. The crystal ball is an image for foresight. No foresight required. Thank you for agreeing with me.

What agreement? Please reread my answer. The entire discussion is about aforethought to be put into design. The 'crystal ball' is not hocus-pocus figments, but is attempting to answer future needs to the cover those forecast possibilities in the new design.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum