More on Spetner's views (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, October 27, 2015, 16:29 (3106 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Spetner is an Orthodox Jew and he believes in a built-in mechanism for rapid adaptation which he calls a 'non-random evolutionary hypothesis':-http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/spetners-non-random-evolutionary-hypothesis/-QUOTE: "“Evolution in Four Dimensions” is a good book to have around. They describe experiments of microsurgery onParamecium. A piece of the cortex was cut out, rotated 180 degrees and reinserted. The offspring inherited the change. (Lamarck 101)(David's bold)-Cellular intelligence as the driving force of evolutionary change is a “non-random evolutionary hypothesis”, but of course it would only work if the restructuring was passed on to the offspring. -QUOTE: "Then came 2011 and the publication of “Evolution: A View from the 21st Century” by James A. Shapiro (a colleague of Dr. McClintock) and even more support for the “non-random evolutionary hypothesis” and “built-in responses to environmental cues”. Again I wondered about Dr Spetner and if he was reading this book too. The book starts out talking about “Sensing, Signaling, and Decision Making in Cell Reproduction” and has a table of “Examples of Targeted Genetic Engineering”. Of course he thinks it all evolved because obviously that is what evolution does or maybe due to coercion from fellow U Chicago Professor Jerry Coyne that is what he had to say to prevent being attacked. [David's bold] But I digress, the book is well worth the read and there is evidence that some mutations happen just when they are needed. They are not random with respect to fitness; it is the organism doing some rearranging to stay fit." (my bold)-David's comment: Note that Spetner believes in God, and perhaps Coyne explains Shapiro.-Bearing in mind Shapiro's explicit belief that cells are sentient, cognitive beings and not automatons, the implication would seem to be that organisms do their own rearranging, (i.e. evolution is driven by their intelligence as opposed to your 3.8 billion year programme or divine dabbling), but "built-in responses" suggests the opposite to "decision-making", so there is certainly some confusion here. However, as I keep emphasizing, the intelligent cell hypothesis, just like the theory of evolution itself, is perfectly compatible with belief in God as the instigator. The sentence you have put in bold is very unclear. What does “it all evolved” refer to? As Shapiro has elsewhere refused to be drawn on the subject of origins, I cannot believe for one moment that he is discussing anything other than how evolution works - not how the intelligent cell came into being. His continued very public championship of cellular intelligence therefore has nothing to do with coercion by Coyne; nor does his belief in evolution (though his 21st century view is clearly very different from Darwin's concept of it), which is compatible with both theism and atheism.