Re: New A C Grayling book

Michael J Davis wrote:

[...]

I think it's important to distinguish between what evolution *requires*
and what evolution *justifies*. There may be features of humanity that are
not in themselves actually needed (or useful) for survival, but are a
natural *by-product* of features that are. As such these could still be
explained in the context of evolution.

Yes, understood. (But I find it fascinating that some things that are
evolutionarily 'neutral', at some later point, become extremely 'useful'
- it's as though they were stored up for later use!)

Yes - but this phenomenon is not at all unique to evolution. There are
numerous examples of pieces of technology having totally unexpected
applications given the original motivation for their invention. With
hindsight it may look like the potential was always there, stored up for
later use.

[...]

3) Therefore it's not at all surprising that this skill of abstraction is
not limited by what is concretely useful for survival.

Yes, but the abstraction of abstraction - as you and I are doing now[1]
- is a really long way from even quite sophisticated physical survival
and even tribal bonding stuff.

[1] Just think. We are using abstract 'ideas' several times removed from
'tangible reality', using ideas that were converted into sounds that
conveyed the idea, that were converted into writing that represents the
sounds, and which I am now seeing on the screen. In looking at these
words, they relate to the sounds that relate to the idea that relates to
a meaning the memory of which I am recalling in my mind into which they
fall into a logical structure that suggests that you and I are sharing
similar thoughts. And boy - does that contribute to me survival!! ;-)

The sophistication and potential of the human brain does indeed appear to
be massive overkill from the point of view of what is required to aid
survival. But sometimes I think overkill solutions are the simplest and
most natural way to achieve a particular goal.

[...]

I bet the skill of abstraction is key to both and that it's been around a
lot longer than 40,000 years. It seems likely the emergence of language
(in the modern sense of language) around 40,000 years ago was a cultural
effect not a result of a significant change in our biology - similar to
the emergence of advanced and deep mathematics in the last few centuries.
I think we had the skills all along but just weren't using them in their
full glory - because such was not directly required for survival.

Yes, but that sounds dangerously ontological!

In what way? (And why would being ontological be dangerous?)

Michael

--
----== posted via PHP Headliner ==----
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Speculative Design Hypothesis (with predictions) 2nd draft
    ... You discuss whether individual mutations produce complexity. ... Creationists forget that evolution is synchronised and why. ... identify single features, except artificially. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Speculative Design Hypothesis (with predictions) 2nd draft
    ... be saying, not because you are saying anything new, but you seem like ... Creationists forget that evolution is synchronised and why. ... identify single features, except artificially. ... Then there's the preconception we just covered -- The Creationists ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Rotten Teeth
    ... unverifiable fish to man version of evolution. ... Did the created whales have ... What's your explanation for the presence of enamelin genes ... free but with limited features. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Speculative Design Hypothesis (with predictions) 2nd draft
    ... be saying, not because you are saying anything new, but you seem like ... Creationists forget that evolution is synchronised and why. ... identify single features, except artificially. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Behe in the latest Protein Science
    ... >>>scientific objection of IDers to evolution is that the probability the ... >>>kind of complex features that we see in living organism arising via ... Or microevolution, if you will, because ... At smaller population sizes, ...
    (talk.origins)