More Denton: My review of my reading so far (Introduction)

by dhw, Wednesday, March 02, 2016, 13:23 (2979 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: And I ask, where did that [the inventive mechanism] come from? You will admit it is just as nebulous. At least in his 'structuralism' he thinks the 'drive to complexity' follows built in laws or guidelines.
dhw: Built in laws or guidelines also require an origin...
DAVID: Denton believes they are a natural part of the first forms or 'Types' to use his term.-I agree: the forms or types are individual organisms with the ‘will' to survive and in some cases to improve. That still doesn't tell us where the first forms and their “natural parts” (laws, guidelines) come from, which was your question. (I keep saying nobody knows, but you keep asking!)-dhw:...as does your universal mind, though you prefer to gloss that over with “first cause”.
DAVID: Does first cause (in some form) exist in your view?-I have told you many times that it does, and I believe it is energy and matter. The question is whether energy and matter have always been conscious or have evolved consciousness. If it's the latter, the question is how and when. But nobody can answer ANY of these questions.-dhw: I do not see the “drive to complexity” as some sort of abstract principle floating around in the ether. It can only exist within organisms themselves, and that requires individual ‘thinking' mechanisms, not a law.
DAVID: Then you disagree with Denton's approach. He thinks initial structures and constraints guide the advances, following rules of nature. Of course he also accepts functional survival.-I can only discuss what you tell me as I haven't read the book, but it seems self-evident to me that the advances would be guided by initial structures and constraints. I do not believe that in our current environment the cell communities which form the elephant will be able to rejig themselves so that it can fly. Once the process begins, each cell community will build on what its predecessors have established. “Rules of nature” is what bothers me. There has to be a mechanism within the cell/cell community that enables it to adapt/invent. This leads to two questions: 1) Where did it come from? 2) How does it work? “Rules of nature” answers neither of those questions, and is therefore just as nebulous as all the other hypotheses we come up with, like God, sheer luck, or an evolving panpsychist consciousness. But perhaps Denton will come up with some answers.