Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.


Jon G wrote:
Your confusing me here, firstly you retreat from the claim that
experience could be an advantage in your opening:
"No, the experience itself is irrelevant..."

NO I am not confusing you, your mode of discussion is very similar to a
very well known ancient Greek philosopher, and it has the same
weaknesses. You are not on trial though, so as we are trying to make
sense of your statements, please read what it says on my statements.

I state that it is an advantage The Being Aware (= what is the
advantage) of your experiences, not even all of them, some are
sufficient, too many are confusing (you don't need to know what your
bowels are doing all the time). The nature of your experiences is
irrelevant, and awareness, can be explained without the experiences as
they will not change the result or reponse of the animal no matter what
they are.

The advantage of awareness in evolution terms is self explanatory and I
have given examples of when NOT being aware can be a problem.


Will the organism simply follow the laws of physics and chemistry which
don't refer to experience, or does experience itself matter (not to be
confused with the biological mechanics of the organism, which current
scientific understanding believes can be described in terms of
chemistry and physics)?

The organism will follow the laws of physics by analysing the situation
that is presented in his/her consciousness (explained above) and taking
action. The situation is represented in the organism central nervous
system (CNS) as experiences, so that elaborate computing can take
place. The nature of the experience is irrelevant and will not change
the outcome of the action of the organism, as long as the experiences
are consistent.

But experiences is also explained by the laws of nature, as they are a
representation of the world around you as of a split second before you
experience and you need to be aware of them to judge them and their
interactions. They are made using the senses, and interpreted using the
brain. All very physical. I agree, that the nature of experiences and
what they are is irrelevant to the outcome.

I think I understand you now. You are trying to keep two realities
alive, your experience, and your understanding of the physical world,
but you aren't seeing things correctly, therefore they seem at odds
with each other, and you try to fudge things to avoid looking at what
appears to be a paradox.

You say:
"The organism will follow the laws of physics by analysing the
situation..."

I find this slightly confusing, what exactly are you talking about in
terms of analysis, I assume you don't mean experiencing thought, and
reasoning etc, I assume you mean the brain is structured in such a way
as to respond appropriately.

Below I have outlined a line of reasoning given your statement "the
organism will follow the laws of physics"

1) If the organism follows the laws of physics as you so clearly state,
then presumably it can be explained by physics.

2) Given physics doesn't reference 'consciousness', the organism's
behaviour must be explainable without reference to its 'consciousness'.

3) Therefore 'consciousness' does not effect behaviour, as it is not
required to explain any behaviour.

4) If it doesn't effect the organisms behaviour within the world, then
it can't be an evolutionary advantage for the organism.

5) There can be no evolutionary advantage for us to have evolved
experiencing anything, or if we did experience, for it to make any
sense, or represent the physical world outside of the organism in
anyway.


Could you in your reply just restrict the answer to the first statement
1-5 which you don't understand or disagree with, or do you understand
it now?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: "Algorithms" in Molecular Biology?
    ... denial that biology "was much too involved to be fully accessible to ... LAWS OF PHYSICS. ... "Is Life Based on the Laws of Physics? ... "NEW LAWS TO BE EXPECTED IN THE ORGANISM ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: "Algorithms" in Molecular Biology?
    ... This is a part of "What is Life?" ... "Is Life Based on the Laws of Physics? ... "NEW LAWS TO BE EXPECTED IN THE ORGANISM ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: "Algorithms" in Molecular Biology?
    ... denial that biology "was much too involved to be fully accessible to ... LAWS OF PHYSICS. ... "Is Life Based on the Laws of Physics? ... "NEW LAWS TO BE EXPECTED IN THE ORGANISM ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
    ... >such they are social constructions used in physics. ... >similar laws of physics to ours, i.e. both act according to our current ... In this imaginary universe there is a being identical ... Note, the organism is set up the same though, it has eyes, ears ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Evolutionary question concerning God.
    ... measuring the length of length of a microbe ... any trait (of any species of organism) that is of any organism, ... I agree the chain of reasoning you put forward, was long, and doesn't ... If the organism follows the laws of physics as you so clearly ...
    (talk.origins)