Wound repair (Introduction)

by dhw, Thursday, April 23, 2015, 12:40 (3290 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Don't you ever question why I introduce you to folks who reach different conclusions than mine? They raise questions with no current answer, that have more than one way to answer. You don't like my answers. That is fair enough, but throwing those authors back at me also begs the questions they help me raise. Again, without chance there must be something that plans: I pick a mind, you pick a nebulous IM, whose capacity at planning is unknown. You have your faith, I have mine. So far the only item we know that can plan is a mind.-As mentioned under “Evolution v. Creationism”, I do not pick anything, and I certainly do not have faith in any particular answer. I simply hypothesize and try to point out the strengths and weaknesses in all the hypotheses. I am and will always remain immensely grateful to you for continuing my science education, but the master cannot always expect the student to extrapolate the same conclusions from the material he presents. Yes, there is more than one answer, and that is why I remain agnostic. The IM is certainly no more nebulous than your UI, and your assumption that the only possible planning mind is your God's is also open to question. There is a parallel here, once you accept the view that all organic matter has its own form of intelligence. The parallel is with humans. Different human intelligences have come up with a vast variety of inventions, often of astonishing complexity. If you grant different forms of intelligence to different organisms, it stands to reason that there will be a vast variety of living forms, created not by one single mind but by millions of “minds”. But these millions of minds could all have stemmed from just one. Yet again, let me repeat that the theory does not exclude God (see under “Evolution v Creationism”).-DAVID: I am vindicated by a famous statement:
"There's a great line from Galileo, which is: "In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.'"-I'm delighted to hear that you regard your views as being one in a thousand. But whether you are on a par with Galileo or Flossie Flat-Earth we shall probably never know.-Thank you for all the posts on ants, spiders, and ear drums, all of which fit in perfectly with the idea that cell communities have their own form of intelligence (convergence = different minds faced with similar problems may come up with similar answers). As regards cell communication, there have been lots of articles describing how cells communicate, but they do not explain how cells come to the decisions that result from and then become the subject of their communication.