Cellular intelligence (Evolution)

by dhw, Monday, January 31, 2022, 12:02 (816 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: At all stages until sapiens (when the ability to complexify is enhanced), expansion RESULTS from the INABILITY of existing cells to meet a new requirement. In your theory, your God operates on each group of brains BEFORE there are any new requirements.

DAVID: By your rule our brain is the endpoint of evolution. No matter how much we learn that is new, the brain stays the same by master complexification.

We are discussing whether evolutionary changes occur before or after changes in conditions – not what might or might not be an endpoint. The brain never stayed/stays the same. In my theory (it’s not a “rule”) each complexification is a change. Here you are referring to sapiens’ brain, and are simply repeating that sapiens’ brain does not expand because complexification has been enhanced – to such a degree that in fact the brain has shrunk. You have no evidence that complexification occurs in ANTICIPATION of the new tasks that are to be performed later, just as you have no evidence that speciation occurs IN ANTICIPATION of conditions that do not yet exist.

dhw: All this has been discussed before, and you have only raised it because it seems to be your last defence of your theory that all evolutionary changes- except for plants and in the Cambrian! - take place BEFORE conditions change rather than in RESPONSE to changing conditions.

DAVID: It isn't the only example but the simplest to use as we have discussed it. You favor a non-God approach with natural expansion.

dhw: This example does NOT prove your theory that your God operates on brains before there is any need for him to do so, and you have not yet found a single example that does. You have even had to concede that in plants and in the Cambrian, conditions must change BEFORE new species can exist. And it is not a non-God approach if an agnostic acknowledges the possibility that there is a God who created the whole mechanism whereby organisms RESPOND to changing conditions, instead of him preprogramming or dabbling every single life form, econiche, lifestyle and natural wonder.

DAVID: Once again you turn to secondhand designing. I view God as never giving up tight control.

You still haven’t found a single example of evolutionary changes taking place in anticipation of future changes in conditions, and a possibly God-designed intelligence is not a “non-God” approach.

Molecular binding controls.
dhw: If you believe in common descent, then every evolutionary innovation will entail a change from what some cells “normally” do automatically.

DAVID: Agreed. New automatic processes appear.

dhw: They only become automatic when they are established. You keep refusing to acknowledge that every system must have a beginning, and if you believe in common descent, then that beginning will take place because of cells that do NOT automatically follow an existing pattern. Intelligence manifests itself when cells are confronted with new problems, conditions, requirements, opportunities.

DAVID: All in the eye of the beholders prejudice. All I see is intelligent design.

dhw: I also see intelligent design, and your prejudice lies in your assumption that your God would not design intelligent cells, but would prefer to do it all himself.

DAVID: I repeat: "Once again you turn to secondhand designing. I view God as never giving up tight control."

We both see intelligent design. Your rigid belief that your God preprogrammed or individually dabbled every single stage of every organ, organism, econiche, lifestyle, natural wonder, solution to problems etc. and could not possibly have given cells the same autonomous ability he has given to sapiens to perceive and process information, communicate and take decisions, might be described as “in the eye of the beholder’s prejudice.” NB It remains a theory, however. I only ask you not to reject it, as you do, solely on the grounds that although it offers a logical explanation of life’s history, it conflicts with your own rigid belief.