Re: The Great Darwinist/ID Debate Thread

Ray wrote:
On Sat, 03 Jun 2006 21:29:41 GMT, Ash <ash.amanic@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Not really, it's just pointing out that saying some systems are IC is not an argument against evolution unless you can also show they couldn't have got that way by natural processes

It should be obvious from what we know about natural causes (according
to common scieintific definitions of material causes) that they can't.
Anyone who claims otherwise haven't thought it all over.

A human being can physically be reduced to at heap of simple
chemicals. Take this heap pf chemicals and place a human being beside
it, and then describe how these simple chemicals would self-assemble
into this extremelt complex and advanced human being, all by
themselves. A human being is not just a fixed structure, it also
functional, conscious, and acts out of intention - in other words,
it's alive. Where in these simple, inanimate chemicals do all those
human properties hide?

The phrase you are looking for is "emergent property."


A computer is a much simpler and far less sophisticated device to
produce than a human body. Why don't we see self-assembled computers
and all kinds of other functional devices evolve spontaneously in
nature? You can't even find the most simple non-living object that
resembles anything we would call a functional device. Why is that? Why
does evolution jump from a very simple level directly up to a very
sophisticated one, completely skipping the level between these two
levels?

We don't see computers self-assemble in nature because there are no computer parents. We _do_ see _humans_ self-assemble within wombs, drawing sustenance from a female in a parasitic relationship, until a while after they are born. Then, they draw sustenance from the life around them until they have self-assembled some more, and then they die.


It's very simple. Matter is nothing but building blocks, raw material
for MIND's creative activities in this physical dimension. Matter
cannot self-organize into anything complex and functional. It takes
something of a higher order, that is, MIND, to think out and build
anything functional and useful from matter. As for the manufaturing of
computers, we are that higher level of MIND, inhabiting and working
through these physical bodies. As for the manufaturing of our bodies
and those of other living beings, The Creator, or God, is that higher
level of MIND. And all manifestations of MIND are non-physical. They
MUST be, for were they physical themselves, they would not be able to
control and manipulate the physical. Matter cannot control matter,
only MIND can.

Gravity manipulates physical properties "downwards" all the time. Does gravity have a mind? Waves erode cliff sides. Does the ocean think? Brainless termites acting on pure instinct - simple chemical robots - build vast underground and aboveground lairs. Are they sapient?

Matter manipulates matter all the time. Mind is an emergent property of matter.

- SRNissen
FABRICATE DIEM, PVNC

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Great Darwinist/ID Debate Thread
    ... not an argument against evolution unless you can also show they couldn't ... Take this heap pf chemicals and place a human being beside ... Matter is nothing but building blocks, ... computers, we are that higher level of MIND, inhabiting and working ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Against Molecular Evolution, a Process of Abiogenesis
    ... Abiogenesis or The Abiotic Origin of Life on Earth ... Matter to aether shall have faded; ... mind than the statical distance-action developed by Poisson. ... of geometrical construction, but by the introduction of the symbol b gave it ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Against Molecular Evolution, a Process of Abiogenesis
    ... Abiogenesis or The Abiotic Origin of Life on Earth ... Matter to aether shall have faded; ... mind than the statical distance-action developed by Poisson. ... of geometrical construction, but by the introduction of the symbol b gave it ...
    (talk.atheism)
  • Stack Overflow
    ... Let's say we try to understand the mind. ... imagine a universe full of people, who have minds, etc, etc. ... maybe our understanding of matter is incomplete? ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Stack Overflow
    ... Let's say we try to understand the mind. ... imagine a universe full of people, who have minds, etc, etc. ... maybe our understanding of matter is incomplete? ...
    (sci.logic)
Loading