Personally, I am not convinced that everything happens through random mutations, natural selection and chance, but I am aware that my view is probably a minority view on this site. — Jack Cummins
An anthropic principle is an anthropocentric bias, or illusion; nature is not fine-tuned for us, rather we fine-tune our concepts and models to nature. — 180 Proof
Consciousness does not arise from matter.
Subjects do not arise from matter either. — 180 Proof
Chaos is not randomness. — 180 Proof
Scientists used to focus on the Random Mutation element of Darwinian Evolution, probably because it eliminated any notion of divine creation. But, especially since the Information Age, more attention has been paid to Natural Selection, as a means to choose from among the novel structures produced by accidental aggregation. Now scientists are using the basic principles of Evolution to design systems that will try millions of options virtually, in order to select the one that produces the best fit for their stated purposes.How can genetic accidents and random mutations explain such complexity? — 3017amen
The world system (nature) must have been designed (programmed) to work toward that end : The Anthropic Principle. — Gnomon
Poor thing, we know. :sweat:I'm confused. — 3017amen
Sure did. Not from you, though, since it's all gibberish and woo-sy babytalk from you and never any relevant, or non-rhetorical, questions. Can you even tell the difference between a question and a pseudo-question, 3017? :roll:Did you not expect to get questioned?
Of course not. Chatting with a troll isn't trolling, troll.Are you trolling my threads again?
I'm a freaky freethinker, son.Are you an angry atheist?
:yikes:I will be copying the moderator's on your posts.
7. Is evolution a random process?
Evolution is not a random process. The genetic variation on which natural selection acts may occur randomly, but natural selection itself is not random at all. The survival and reproductive success of an individual is directly related to the ways its inherited traits function in the context of its local environment. Whether or not an individual survives and reproduces depends on whether it has genes that produce traits that are well adapted to its environment.
Life's Grand Design Learn More
Life's Grand Design
Scientists used to focus on the Random Mutation element of Darwinian Evolution, probably because it eliminated any notion of divine creation. But, especially since the Information Age, more attention has been paid to Natural Selection, as a means to choose from among the novel structures produced by accidental aggregation. Now scientists are using the basic principles of Evolution to design systems that will try millions of options virtually, in order to select the one that produces the best fit for their stated purposes.How can genetic accidents and random mutations explain such complexity? — 3017amen
That's a fact, Jack! And, as Banno said : "Natural selection is not random, nor chance". The Greeks vaguely understood that Nature was characterized by two opposing forces : Good vs Evil, Or, what we now call constructive Energy and destructive Entropy, or future-oriented Positive vs dead-end Negative. So Plato proposed a scenario -- based on intuition, not empirical science -- in which orderly Cosmos was organized from disorderly Chaos by divine Logos (reason). But, modern Chaos theorists have found that in every disorganized system there is a "seed" of hidden order. So, it shouldn't be surprising that the random element of evolution is offset to some degree by the non-random action of Natural Selection. Hence, it's the logical act of "selection" that extracts Order from within Disorder, and Cosmos from Chaos. That's also why Banno's terse epigram is a true statement. And your equally brief assertion is correct, but incomplete.Chaos is not randomness. — 180 Proof
Those programmers must begin by establishing Initial Conditions as a starting point that seems to be close to the desired outcome — Gnomon
Nonlinear dynamic systems are deterministic.So,how do you explain why"Chaos is not Random"? — Gnomon
Charitably, G, you've been playing tennis without a net for a long ... long ... long ... time. :clap:Is somebody cheating? :joke:
Initial Conditions--->Laws of Physics--->Organized Complexity — 3017amen
Matter--->Laws of Physics---> Mind — 3017amen
Primates--->Value Systems--->Humans — 3017amen
If nature+g/G can't be distinguished from nature-g/G – according to every theistic g/G religious tradition extant they must be distinguishable (re: "revealed") – then, at the very least, Occam's Razor cuts your preacher's lying throat. — 180 Proof
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. — H. L. Mencken
"Quotation, n: The act of repeating erroneously the words of another." ~Ambrose Bierce↪180 Proof
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
— H. L. Mencken — TheMadFool
"Quotation, n: The act of repeating erroneously the words of another." ~Ambrose Bierce — 180 Proof
"Quotation, n: The act of repeating erroneously the words of another." ~Ambrose Bierce — 180 Proof
The issue it seems is not whether the ends [Mind, Humans, Organized Complexity] can come about with/without an intelligent agency (god/creator) working on the beginnings [Matter, Primates, Initial conditions] but whether the two possibilities - a god-created universe vs a universe without one - can be distinguished from each other in the first place! — TheMadFool
Tmf!
Sure. Hence my view:
Evolution that depends on random mutations, genetic accidents, and natural selection requires complex initial conditions. This so-called evolutionary argument depends on nature being able to select from a collection of similar competing individuals.
But, when it comes to the laws of physics and the initial cosmological conditions to support life there is no ensemble of competitors. The laws and initial conditions are unique to our universe. If it's the case that the existence of Life requires the laws of physics, and the initial conditions of the universe to be fine-tuned with high-precision and complexity, then the suggestion of an Anthropic design is far from absurd. — 3017amen
think we need to be as cautious as we should be open-minded about this.
Cautious because beliefs - theism included - have consequences that permeate all aspects of life and living. — TheMadFool
Sure Tmf!
Feel free to embellish in that reasoning. Thanks for your thoughts! — 3017amen
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.