Higher math and Darwin (Introduction)

by dhw, Friday, April 09, 2010, 08:13 (5151 days ago) @ xeno6696

MATT: It [natural selection] doesn't create anything new--but it is what decides (ultimately) what genes get conserved. [...] And if these genes accumulate enough--at what point do you say that whatever creature it describes isn't something "new?"-The problem I was discussing here was that creationists and atheists alike misrepresent the theory of evolution to suit their own arguments. Evolution appears to be a mixture of random events (mutations, changes of environment), and non-random natural selection whereby advantageous changes survive. You can't have the one without the other. However, the real point at issue between you and me is the next one:-DHW to MATT: the dilemma of chance v. design, as far as I am concerned, relates principally to (a) above. [(a) = the origin of the mechanisms that made life and evolution possible]. I don't have a problem with the role played by chance once those mechanisms are in place, but we do not have one scrap of evidence that chance is capable of assembling them. -MATT: I think we have spoken of this before: I still hold that because chance is an intrinsic part of the process, you can't simply create an artificial dividing line delineating the two. You have to be able to separate chance into chance, and design into design--and this simply isn't possible, because what if chance was part of the design in the first place? Why people like Pigliucci stay away from these conversations it is at THIS point that we are really discussing the nature of God without having demonstrated what, exactly--is God?-As I tried to make clear above, I have no problem believing that chance is part of the evolutionary pattern. The dividing line comes right at the beginning: Chapter One, in which you seem to take the mechanism for life, reproduction, adaptability and innovation for granted, and I don't. Once we proceed to Chapter Two, i.e. once the mechanism is in place and evolution gets underway, I agree that we can't draw borderlines. But in Chapter One either you believe in the theory of abiogenesis, or you believe in the theory of design, or you sit on the fence. The nature of God comes later. You only speculate on that if you're prepared to consider the design theory. -*** I shall be away for three days, but will catch up next week.
---


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum