Well thanks Rich, but I'm not in the field. I did a couple of degrees in biological and molecular science and lectured for a few years, but then argued with the wrong person. I've always had the passion for it though.

Great philosophers are foremost curious, resorceful, and creative.

Absolutely. Its the puzzle and debate and bouncing of ideas that's exciting.

That's it. It's detective work. The practical effects for yourself and your loved ones are enormous. It's called creative evolution.

Because there's no asolute fitness, it always depends on the environment, and other beings are part of that. When no wombats exist, only kangaroos do, wombat is the fittest being, and vice versa, because of the lack of competition.

of course there is no such thing as absolute fitness. There are as many ways for life to adapt as a creative mind allows. The fitness theory quickly morphs into a creative evolution theory once one is forced to confront what is actually happening. In educational institutions there is no arguing over the text.

That's it. It's detective work. The practical effects for yourself and your loved ones are enormous. It's called creative evolution. — Rich

Ha ha, very good.

But as Creative Evolutionists say, Blue Banana, the environment is just the canvas that allows the expression of the creativity to be seen. It must be expressed against something.

It is unfortunate, but creativity is suppressed both inside and outside of the educational system. Industry wants lemmings and the educational system prepares students to be as such, even in the arts. However, for those who develop their creative spirit, there are many rewards.

Let's take two premises:
-Different beings have different probabilities of surviving and successfully reproducing.
-Offspring of any being at least partially inherits the traits of its parent(s).
-Definition: fitness means having traits that make it more likely for a being to survive and produce offspring.
From these we can directly deduct the survival of the fittest, unless we have very different definitions of that theory.

I have creativity but it doesn't mean I buy a canvas to utilize that creativity, and the existence of canvas doesn't imply expressions of creativity either, and neither does the canvas having something on it.

You're not wrong, ever moreso these days. Creativity is being trampled by bureacracy, proven documented accountability, action plans, centralised control of the curriculum and Scope and Sequences as well as common agreement through meetings on the way things should be taught where the one with the most votes wins. - that of course for the teachers. The students that are coming out of the sausage factories though, don't look like sausages and nobody is sure why...

You are writing on your canvas right now, Blue Banana. It's a lovely picture of the defence of an antiquated evolutionary system :) .

I agree on that but it doesn't prove I'm expressing all the creativity I could. As for the discussion on creativity in our societies, I partially agree, but must simultaneously note that it's a gross generalization.

Hence the canvas.

The canvas is functioning like an effective filter for all the possible creative combinations you could be expressing right now. Of course, being the complex organism you are, you might be also expressing your creativity in a variety of other areas simultaneously, such as your clothing, arrangement of the room, coffee you are drinking etc.

Imbuing genes with all kinds of human characteristics such surviving, reproducing, fittest, traits, etc. simply shifts the actions of the mind to gene. It doesn't explain anything. It is still the mind that is reacting to changes in the environment and adapting as best as it can.

The mind does indeed exist at all levels of life in a single body, e.g. cells, bacteria, viruses, neurons, etc. and they work in together to adapt. This is why I practice music, Tai Chi, Qigong, sports, etc. It trains my body to work in unity so it can adapt. In sports, it makes one a better player. In health it makes one more capable to resist and to heal.

From these we can directly deduct the survival of the fittest, unless we have very different definitions of that theory. — BlueBanana

So, to come back to Divergent Evolution, should the allele diversity in the population increase rapidly in the population or become conservative to conserve those successful genes?

I agree on that but it doesn't prove I'm expressing all the creativity I could. — BlueBanana

Understanding life is not about proofs. Thousands of years of experience with this approach has gotten us no where.

We can understand life by direct self observation and observation of what is around us, feeling, intuition and a bit of detective. Observe yourself, your mind, constantly adapting to new environments. Observe how you change as you adapt (maybe you play sports?). This is creative evolution in action.

Increase.

Welcome aboard.

You lost me there. Are you claiming that the survival of the fittest and creative evolution are the same thing by different names? Btw, I'm don't believe in the élan vital which seems pretty central so not aboard.

Understanding life is not about proofs. — Rich

True, but the evolution of biological organisms isn't the same thing as understanding life.

Imbuing genes with all kinds of human characteristics such surviving, reproducing, fittest, traits, etc. simply shifts the actions of the mind to gene. It doesn't explain anything. — Rich

So your argument is that because of complexity of human mind, actions, culture, survival in modern society regardless of our genes etc. we choose our companions based on non-genetic traits so the survival of the fittest doesn't apply? Very much possible but I can't say the same for other animals.

True, but the evolution of biological organisms isn't the same thing as understanding life. — BlueBanana

If one ruminates over this statement one might find that understanding evolution is all about understanding life. That is why "natural selection" is sacrosanct to materialism, i.e. chemicals "naturally" come together and morph into life - and stay there. It is the greatest miracle ever told.

Very much possible but I can't say the same for other animals. — BlueBanana

All minds are necessarily different and are on different paths. However, dog owners certainly feel very connected to them.

Btw, I'm don't believe in the élan vital which seems pretty central so not aboard. — BlueBanana

The Elan vital (Bergson's terminology) is nothing more than the creative will that the mind exerts. This stands in contrast to the mind's memory. If you feel you have a creative element and if you feel you have the will that you can utilize to try to manifest this creativity, then that is the Elan vital. It is only what one experiences every day.

The Elan vital (Bergson's terminology) is nothing more than the creative will that the mind exerts. This stands in contrast to the mind's memory. If you feel you have a creative element and if you feel you have the will that you can utilize to try to manifest this creativity, then that is the Elan vital. It is only what one experiences every day. — Rich

This is not all the term implies. I obviously believe in creative mind, but not its role in evolution that creative evolution gives to it.

If one ruminates over this statement one might find that understanding evolution is all about understanding life. That is why "natural selection" is sacrosanct to materialism, i.e. chemicals "naturally" come together and morph into life - and stay there. It is the greatest miracle ever told. — Rich

The materialistic explanation has been proven true. We know how those chemicals, molecules and cells are formed and what their structure is. I don't consider myself a materialist but materialistic explanations can indeed explain our physicl world.

All minds are necessarily different and are on different paths. However, dog owners certainly feel very connected to them. — Rich

Could you elaborate?

This is not all the term implies. I obviously believe in creative mind, but not its role in evolution that creative evolution gives to it. — BlueBanana

That's all it is. The mind is creatively adapting to changing circumstances, the mind operating at all instances of life. There is nothing more to the Elan vital.

The materialistic explanation has been proven true. — BlueBanana

Well this is prima facie not the case since the materialist explanation, whatever it is, is changing all the time and is nothing more than a spaghetti bowl of ideas that are tossed about as much as finding will allow. In other words, it is an outright mess without any proof and any hope for proof. But if you are satisfied with "it" (no one can describe what "it" is), then that is your choice. Personally, I never subscribe to obvious obfuscation.