More Denton: Reply to David (Introduction)

by David Turell , Sunday, July 26, 2015, 19:50 (3199 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: “Can be”. They can also be mental processes, just as our brain produces decisions, strategies, and inventions. You have already agreed that each possibility is as likely as the other, and yet you still exclude one because it does not fit in with your preconceptions.-They are not preconceptions. I have explained my thought processes to come from agnostic to theist, and I have not seen anything since to change my mind or conclusions.-
> dhw: Pfeffer's bacteria could not have got to the soup without automatic perceptions and automatic movements, but what made them decide to swim through the poisoned disinfectant?-If a bacterium feels the need to eat it will go for the food, all automatically. -> dhw; You are happy to consider research on automatic behaviour, but why do you ignore research on behaviour that suggests intelligence?-Because, as I've explained over and over, one cannot tell the difference in single-cells organisms between automatic and making intelligent choices. I've chosen a point of view that I do not see refuted. If an 'expert' says it looks intelligent, doesn't mean it is. - 
> dhw: I agree that we are the mental pinnacle of evolution, at least so far. However, I don't know of any rational articles in which God informs us of his intentions, and some people might regard the fact that your thoughts have never changed as evidence of a closed mind. Ts ts!-And you can't reach any conclusions to leave the picket fence. Pot and kettles!