Teleology & evolution: Stephen Talbott's take (Introduction)

by dhw, Thursday, June 16, 2016, 13:24 (2877 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: This fits my idea that a complexification mechanism is at work with an h-p of hominids as you suggest.
dhw: So 3.8 billion years ago he provided the first cells with a multichoice programme ...This sort of lottery was built into the first cells to cover every single innovation and natural wonder throughout the entire history of evolution, except when God dabbled. Is that still correct?-DAVID: A while ago I proposed that evolution follows primary patterns. I think that fits.-If we believe in common descent, then it is obvious that patterns will be handed down.-DAVID: The concept of complexification then allows for inventions that branch out into several possibilities of complexity, at which point natural selection picks a winner. If a complex mechanism needs help to work properly, God dabbles. Not really multiple choice so much as multiple invention pathways, several of which can appear at the same time, presuming that such a complexity mechanism (module) is somewhere hidden in the layers of the genome.-In passing, “work properly” shows that complexity is not an end in itself. It has to have a function. However, the burning question is HOW this complexity mechanism works. Once again, your thinking blocks out the fact that either the complexities/ pathways/inventions have been preprogrammed/dabbled by your God, or the mechanism (possibly God-given) produces them autonomously. If they were not dabbled, all the choices or pathways or whatever you want to call them were preprogrammed 3.8 billion years ago in the very first cells. That means every single innovation and variation (multiple choice/pathway) in the history of evolution had to be handed down through every generation of organisms and every change in the environment. The only freedom you have allowed organisms is to choose between different sets of on-board instructions, and the higgledy-piggledy bush is explained by God providing every higgledy-piggledy variation for them to choose from. -Do you not think it more feasible that all these higgledy-piggledy innovations, variations, convergences have come about through the organisms themselves finding their own individual ways to cope with or exploit the environment, instead of your God having to provide them with every single solution?
 
dhw: If it takes human intelligence to copy the work of natural organisms, how does that prove that natural organisms do not have intelligence? I'm not saying the burr is another Einstein, but I would not discount cellular intelligence even in plants.
DAVID: It doesn't take much intelligence to copy biomechanisms in nature, but my point is these natural mechanisms are gifts to us to use that we don't have the capacity to invent with our big brains. Why do you think cells without brains can do these amazing mechanisms? I know the answer: Shapiro's single-celled bacteria make meaningful responses to stimuli. Not the same level of inventive capacity!-With our big brains we don't have the capacity to invent these amazing mechanisms, and the reason why cells without brains can invent them is that bacteria do not have the same level of inventive capacity as….as…what? Once again: do you really believe that your God personally dabbled or preprogrammed the first cells to pass on every single natural wonder, from prickly burrs to weaverbirds' nests, as well as every single evolutionary innovation from eukaryotes to humans?