Re: The Best Explanation: Creation or Evolution?

Kazmer Ujvarosy wrote:

"John Wilkins" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e0stn8$mg9$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Kazmer Ujvarosy wrote:

Hey guys, are you speedreaders? You had no time to read the entire
article.


"John Wilkins" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:e0sh9f$2lgo$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

haelduksf@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

I thought that arguments from first principles went out with Descartes!


No, phenomenologists also engage in it. I just hope they wash their
hands
afterwards.

I read as far as the "principle of causality" before giving up. If there
is
such a principle in the literature (and I haven't come across it as such),
it
can only be directed to causal claims of *physical* magnitude. For
example,
the accelration of a rocket cannot exceed the force of its thrust, or the
vectors of two forces cannot exceed the sum.

But "complexity" isn't a physical magnitude. It's entirely abstract. Take
the
famous Bernard Cells. You heat some water to a point over a uniform heat
source and if it's shallow enough you get convenction cells forming. Is
this
more "complex" than unheated water? No. It's still got the same molecules,
but
the heat organises them so that slightly less hot regions form cells. The
hot
water is more energetic, but it's no more "complex" than the unheated
water,
*except* if you specify some metric (like gross geometry).

Organisms evolve from one thermodynamically useful state to another. They
are
organised in different ways, and some complexity is just the artifact of
what
we find complex or less so. Other complexity is due to the aggregation and
coevolution of cells as colonies. Some are organisms. It's not a cause
less
than the effect, it's just cause and effect. At every point, the organisms
were less energetic that their energy sources, so no physical magnitude is
exceeded here.

The headline? It's all in your head. Complexity is something we apply to
the
world. In the (biological) world, there are just molecules and energy,
rearranging themselves in ordinary ways.


--
John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Biohumanities Project
University of Queensland - Blog: evolvethought.blogspot.com
Who are you going to believe? Me, or your own eyes?

--------------------

Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance. Allegedly you're a postdoctoral
research fellow, and you have no clue what the principle of causality is all
about.

And here is where you had a place to insert a rebuttal to what the principle
of causality is all about. Apparently, you had no clue.

That explains the sad state of affairs in the Biohumanities Project.
I assume you don't know much more about the principle of biogenesis either.

It seems you have no concept of context in which a principle might well apply.

You wrote: "In the (biological) world, there are just molecules and energy,
rearranging themselves in ordinary ways." That biological world must be
confined to your head, because in ours there are not only molecules and
energy, but intelligence as well.

And when you remove enough molecules, intellegince ceases; when you remove
enough energy, intellegence quiets. Apparently it is not conserved like
mass and energy, but is just an attribute of their arrangement.

--
Joe

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Best Explanation: Creation or Evolution?
    ... I read as far as the "principle of causality" before giving up. ... But "complexity" isn't a physical magnitude. ... Organisms evolve from one thermodynamically useful state to another. ... energy, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Best Explanation: Creation or Evolution?
    ... I read as far as the "principle of causality" before giving up. ... But "complexity" isn't a physical magnitude. ... Organisms evolve from one thermodynamically useful state to another. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Re: The Best Explanation: Creation or Evolution?
    ... I read as far as the "principle of causality" before giving up. ... But "complexity" isn't a physical magnitude. ... Organisms evolve from one thermodynamically useful state to another. ... In the world, there are just molecules and energy, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Information transfer without energy transfer ?
    ... Does a transfer of information necessary need a transfer of energy? ... since it does not infringe the causality ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Arrow of Time
    ... which one to use can be derived from the principle of determinism: ... the principle of causality, ... could be a quantum Heisenberg operator). ...
    (sci.physics.research)