Innovation (Introduction)

by dhw, Wednesday, May 08, 2013, 20:08 (4016 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: There is no reason in Darwin theory to cause an appearance of humans, or for that matter to have complex life appear from bacteria.-dhw: We agreed long ago that evolution was not NECESSARY, so there is no point in using lack of necessity as an argument for the uniqueness of humans.-DAVID: Not true. As long as organisms are evolving necessity for change is one of the parameters. It is not an issue of evolution as a necessary process, evolution appears to be a necessary assumption as having occurred. But if evolution is to be an ongoing process, organisms must respond to necessity.-You have been arguing that humans were not necessary and that proves they are unique. But since bacteria have survived, no other form of life was "necessary", and so humans are not unique. If evolution advances partly through responses to necessity, and partly through experimental innovation, that also applies to humans, and so again they are not unique. You may have other unique strings to your bow, but lack of necessity is not one of them.-Discounting chance, I have outlined each phase of your theist scenario and my panpsychist scenario. Not surprisingly you approve of the former and dismiss the latter, as follows:-dhw: first-cause non-conscious energy formed and was within many entities (matter), in some of which the energy developed intelligence (faith required).
DAVID: Not my faith! A very confusing scenario to me.-No more and no less confusing than an eternally intelligent but hidden entity which is conscious at a quantum level ... though nobody knows what that means ... can create universes and bacteria from without and within, aims to create humans, ends up with dinosaurs and a billion other species instead, and so has to dabble (how?) from without but not from within (see your post to BBella).-dhw: the many intelligent entities cooperated from within to create the universe and life.-DAVID: How many Gods are there in your pantheon?-None. Each intelligent entity cooperates with other intelligent entitities without any kind of divine intervention. -dhw: the many entities went on cooperating from within to create all species, including humans.-I think all you would get is a hodge podge. Evolution fits as a bush because of all the similarities of forms, both analagous and homologous.-A bush IS a hodge podge! But each innovation takes place within existing organisms, and each organism is descended from common ancestors, so naturally there are similarities of forms!-dhw: there is no single universal intelligence, but only individual intelligences which continue to cooperate.-DAVID: Jumping off in every direction. Your proposal has no sense of coordination or similarity in organisms.-Bushes grow in every different direction. See above for the rest.-dhw: Each of these has a basic premise that requires faith (which is why I remain agnostic). The rest follows on quite logically.-DAVID: It is your logic, not mine.-Both scenarios lead logically to the bush of evolution.-dhw: The first raises all kinds of questions about the nature and purpose of your single entity;-DAVID: Yes it does, but we are here with the gift of life, and that is the purpose.-You can take that as your purpose whether God exists or not.-dhw: the second is confined to the realities we know of (the universe and life). What would Ockham say?-DAVID: That your proposal has no basis in what we are learning. As life, studied in organic chemistry, is shown to have increasing complexity that requires a strong consideration for design and planning. Occam would say that life is one phenomenon that requires complexity, not simplicity. He would conclude, as a priest, that a designer is necessary.-The panpsychist scenario I am offering also shows increasing complexity and design, but instead of being imposed by a single outside entity, the design is created by inside intelligences that cooperate with one another. Life, as studied in organic chemistry and as exemplified over and over again by your marvellous posts under "Nature's Wonders" never ceases to illustrate the manner in which intelligences both communicate and cooperate (e.g. you basil and your pepper), and innovate (e.g. your comb jelly).