Cellular intelligence (Evolution)

by dhw, Friday, February 04, 2022, 07:47 (1021 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: […] Instead of your God operating on brains to expand them BEFORE extra cells were needed, I propose that brains expanded IN RESPONSE to a need, and then proceeded to cope with subsequent needs through complexification, until once again they needed extra cells. No brain was/is OVER-EXPANDED! The cells are in use all the time. And sapiens shrinkage was not because of “over-expansion” but because cells which had been in use became redundant when complexification took over.

DAVID: So you have a theory that brains expand by doing it themselves, and I have God, the designer.

Why have you changed the subject? You claim that your God expands brains before any expansion is needed, and he designs life forms before the new conditions exist in which they are to live. I propose that brains expand IN RESPONSE to new requirements, and species evolve IN RESPONSE to new conditions. And there is no “overexpansion” of brains, because all the cells are used for complexification until a new major requirement demands additional cells. You know perfectly well that my theory allows for your God as the designer of the mechanisms for complexification and expansion, and you have already agreed that complexification takes place without his intervention, so why shouldn’t expansion do the same? If he can design cells to establish their own connections, why should it be impossible for him to enable them to add to their numbers and to enable the skull cells to adjust accordingly?

Fire spot

dhw: So you were wrong. The new brain did not go unused for thousands of years, as you have claimed, and our ancestors were a darn sight cleverer than you thought.

DAVID: Not wrong. Just enabled to figure out a new problem.

dhw So you don’t think that figuring out a new problem constitutes use of the brain.

DAVID: Just what I said.

You have told us repeatedly that the new brain went unused for thousands of years. That was the whole point of your theory that it was “overexpanded”, with God giving us extra cells in anticipation of later requirements. The new brain clearly did not go unused if it was already solving such problems.

Transferred from “More Miscellany”:

DAVID: Secondhand design by many cells is amorphous without a specific direction.

dhw: The specific direction of all the designs is survival. If your God exists, he will have a wider purpose, and we can only speculate what that might be.

DAVID: No speculation, humans!

dhw: And so you repeat your theory, ignoring the massive contradictions we are discussing on that thread, and you refuse to speculate on logical alternatives.

DAVID: Just as you continuously repeat your illogical view of God

What illogical view? I have offered you alternative theistic interpretations of life’s history, all of which you agree are logical. Your only objection has been that they “humanize” your God, although you agree that he probably has thought patterns and emotions and logic like ours, and we mimic him.

dhw: Yep, a molecule with a mind of its own would certainly be a brilliant design. Why do you assume that a life form that acts intelligently (as if it has a mind of its own) is not intelligent and does not have a mind of its own?

DAVID: 'We cannot agree if the possible interpretations from the outside of cells are 50/50. From inside the cell, all studies show automaticity.

You must be joking. We can only draw conclusions from the behaviour of cells – i.e. we are outside them and observing them from the outside. Or are you telling me you know of a scientist who turned himself into a cell, found himself obeying God's instructions, and then came back to tell us all about it?