Brain expansion (Evolution)

by David Turell , Wednesday, May 27, 2020, 18:35 (1428 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: Since your God is all-powerful and all-knowing, I’m sure he would have known what particular thoughts and activities would result in his mechanism expanding the relevant bits of the brain that were needed to give material expression to the thoughts – just as he would have known how his complexification mechanism would have responded to those thoughts.

I don't know if God can predict each of my thoughts. Stop imagining my God's abilities. But I'm sure He fully understands how His mechanisms would work.

dhw: You will only accept autonomous cellular intelligence (possibly invented by your God) as the driving force of evolution if I agree that it is neither autonomous nor intelligent but is dependent on your God’s preprogramming or dabbling. Meanwhile, do you or do you not accept that your theory concerning both brain expansion in particular and evolution in general (God preprogrammed or dabbled it all) is as unproven as mine? If you accept this, please stop using “unproven” as a reason for rejecting my theory.

DAVID: I can't accept inventions from nothing. What we know is, that on the way to humans brains, resulted from provided expansions especially in the area that can conceive of complex concepts, when the soul wishes to do that.

dhw: I’m sorry, but I can’t follow your syntax or your argument. If we accept your dualism, we have agreed that the soul conceives of concepts, using the brain for information and material expression.

All I said was the capable brain areas have to be there for the soul to use.

DAVID: That shows underlying purpose in the process. We can assume previous brains could complexify a bit. You've agreed. We know in our brain, learning and complex thinking by the soul, results in complexification which shrinks the brain, which apparently is somewhat oversized to allow this process to occur. These are the only facts we have to work with.

dhw: Agreed. And since we know that the modern brain changes (complexifies) in response to learning and complex thinking, it is not unreasonable to suppose that the ancient brain did the same, but when its ability to complexify reached a limit, it needed increased capacity and therefore expanded. For some reason (you didn’t like my anatomical explanation) expansion stopped and complexification took over, apart from minor expansions, and was so efficient that certain parts of the brain were no longer necessary, which led to shrinkage. You have rejected the expansion part of this theory on the grounds that it is not proven, and I have asked you not to use that as a reason for rejection.

We only can point to shrinkage as fact. Enlargement has its own mechanism. I chose God as agent.

DAVID: These facts can only lead me to God as the designer. There is no natural evidence for a method of expansion. So you introduce your version of God providing the brain with its own expansion mechanism. Fine. We are now somewhat is agreement, until I add that my purposeful God will have guidelines in the expansion process to be sure of the directionality of His guided evolutionary process. And you balk. That your God shouldn't be in that much control makes no sense to me.

dhw: Both theories allow for God as the designer. Thank you for now agreeing that he could have provided an expansion mechanism, instead of dabbling each and every expansion. Your sudden agreement is suddenly accompanied by nebulous guidelines, and I have answered that point above. Your all-knowing God would have known what his mechanism would produce,

My God would not allow a mechanism that produces changes on its own. If He knows what will happen, it has guidelines, which fits your bolded sentence.

dhw: and that mechanism would have involved the cooperative work of the cells which he had endowed with the intelligence to change their own structure in response to new requirements. The rest of your post again harps on the existence of a designer, which is not the subject under discussion here since my theory allows for a designer. There is only one point that requires an answer:

DAVID: We disagree on the attributes only because you inexplicably want natural causes while ignoring the chain of reasoning just presented.

dhw: I see no reason at all why your God should not have invented a system whereby every effect had a natural cause, e.g. brains expanded and/or complexified, and skulls and birth canals expanded, and pre-whales' legs turned into flippers, IN RESPONSE to new requirements, and bees bite leaves and ants build cities and weaverbirds construct nests using their natural (God-given?) intelligence rather than being preprogrammed or constantly having their genomes dabbled with.

It is not my God you are describing. And, as usual , you have no idea how natural intelligence develops so you sneak in a possible God, as you continue to try it both ways as if you have an argument. Both ways is no way.