Joined: Jul 2002 Posts: 510 Location: Cincinnati, OH Highscores:1 Thanks: 0 Thanked: 18 times in 16 posts
Gender:
Complexity and Intelligence
Intelligent Design hypothesizes that certain biological structures are so complex, they must have been designed by an intelligent process.
However complexity doesn't necessarily indicate intelligence. The complexity in biodiversity is evidence against an intelligent process.
Quote:I learned that Levin had spent most of his adult life trekking in Central Asia and the Caucasus collecting 1,117 varieties of living pomegranates from twenty-seven countries on four continents and had written more than 150 scientific papers.
Joined: Jun 2004 Posts: 3552 Location: NJ
Thanks: 1 Thanked: 5 times in 5 posts
Gender: Country:
Re: Complexity and Intelligence
Dawkins explains this well in "Watchmaker"...he shows how "Irreducible Complexity" is quite reducable. One improvement at a time...the not so miraculous becomes, over time and after many steps, truly miraculous.
I also like his explanation of what is miraculous, depending on how long the witness' lifespan is. What seems like a bad bet/ improbable outcome to us, may not be all that improbable to a being with a lifespans of thousands of years.
Mr. P.
The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.
The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"
I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper
Joined: Nov 2004 Posts: 2557 Location: decentralized
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Re: Complexity and Intelligence
As far as I know, the young earth theory has nothing to do with Intelligent Design. And I don't know that the ID proponents would have much of a problem with the question of minute diversity, like that raised by the question of all the varieties of pomegranates. That doesn't make ID any more defensible, really, but let's be clear as to what issues are addressed by ID.
Frankly, I'm not sure why some Christians are so intent on lending an aura of scientific authority to the Creationist account. It seems to me that the question of complexity and irreducibility would be better handled by making reference to Christ's analogy of the mustard seed. There is, in that passage, an image of complexity arising from simplicity that could easily lend itself to reconciliation with evolutionary theory -- moreover, it's a passage embedded in the New Testament, which ought to give it some weight over the Old Testament creation, at least with Christians.
I suspect that the insistence on the validity of the creation story has a lot to do with where it leads, rather than with its validity as a view of natural history. That is to say, some Christian seem to be defending the Genesis story mostly as a crutch for its complimentary part, the Johannine Revelation.
Joined: Nov 2005 Posts: 4
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Re: Complexity and Intelligence
"There is, in that passage, an image of complexity arising from simplicity that could easily lend itself to reconciliation with evolutionary theory."
Haha. As in, the Earth is the ripe mustard plant, the Kingdom of God? Yeah, I suppose that would be fitting for a Christian, but I don't see how that reconciles so easily with evolutionary theory.
Evolutionary theory makes no value claims on the destiny or purpose of life on earth, except (maybe it could be argued), on the necessity of biodiversity in order for life to survive on earth. In the Christian tradition, we understand very clearly why life exists, especially non-human life. Are we not supposed to be Stewards of the earth, according to the Christian stories?
"I suspect that the insistence on the validity of the creation story has a lot to do with where it leads, rather than with its validity as a view of natural history."
Here's what I have difficulty with: The creation story fails as a valid view of natural history. So, of course, we don't entertain it in biology or in biology classrooms (maybe in a religious studies course?). Not only that, but what it implies, by placing humans at the center of the unfolding story of Life on earth, is just anthropocentric and factually untrue, given what we know about the abundance and diversity of species on earth (our role is really a minor one, in this play, no matter how big we paint our names on the billboards).
So what good is this story pointing us towards, anyway? To paint a picture of humans as an extension of God's hand on earth? To give us the hubris to act as we like, since we've got the support of a Creator and saved soul to back us?
Bah.
-- Thea.
Stare for too long into the abyss and the abyss stares back into you. -- Nietzsche.
Joined: Nov 2004 Posts: 2557 Location: decentralized
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Re: Complexity and Intelligence
thealogian: Yeah, I suppose that would be fitting for a Christian, but I don't see how that reconciles so easily with evolutionary theory.
I'm not saying that it necessarily reconciles one with the other either way. But it does seem to me that, for whatever reason, there has been a more or less conscious choice on the part of some Christians to reject evolutionary theory despite the avenues for reconciliation. I don't see the conflict as a matter of inexorable doctrine, nor of inflexible interpretation. There's something more to some Christians' unwillingness to even consider evolutionary theory, and I'm interested in getting at what that is.
Evolutionary theory makes no value claims on the destiny or purpose of life on earth, except (maybe it could be argued), on the necessity of biodiversity in order for life to survive on earth.
The deductive theory itself, no. But beginning with Darwin himself, proponents of evolutionary theory have interpreted the ideas of natural selection and evolution to favor certain value claims. It seems there's a certain allure for using evolutionary theory as a prop for ideology, and very few practicing scientists or secular laypersons are immune.
Are we not supposed to be Stewards of the earth, according to the Christian stories?
That's one vein of Christian thought. The eschatological vein excuses all sorts of environmental abuses under the argument that the whole of creation is marked for demolition in the near future, so it's not really worth preserving for the long term.
Here's what I have difficulty with: The creation story fails as a valid view of natural history.
It was likely never asserted as a valid view of natural history, until someone decided to employ it as a workable alternative hypothesis to evolution theory. I think it very likely that previous generations were more keenly aware of the mythological value of the Creation story. But even the medievals -- no keen scientists, those, for the most part -- had a more pluralistic view of natural history, one that accomodated both the orthodoxy of the church and the pagan philosophical schemes of Aristotle and Ptolemy.
So what good is this story pointing us towards, anyway?
Good question -- which is what I usually say when I don't have a good answer. Harold Bloom, in the essays he wrote for "The Book of J", suggests that the creation story is more a literary work than a liturgical one. There is, he suggests, a strong element of irony in the whole thing. Well, that's one line of inquiry, and I think Bloom makes some very valid suggestions, but it probably doesn't answer the entire question for us. Even if it is a literary work, and a satire at that, it was probably derived from the actual mythological and folk traditions that were pouring into Jerusalem during the Golden Age of Israel. Those traditions were likely geared towards an explanation of the presence of evil and suffering -- and, notably, inequality -- but that they provide a symbolic explanation does not imply that they excuse them at all. This obviously is not a naturalistic explanation, and probably was not accepted as one until the stories began to take hold as doctrine. Rather, they were likely mythologies meant to console, much as Job is clearly intended to console. But in the context of Christian fundamentalism they take on a very different character, in part because they're drawn into rigid association with the apocalyptic view of the Revelation -- another book taken waaaay out of context, so far as I can tell.
By the way, welcome to the forum. You seem like a good addition so far.
Joined: Aug 2003 Posts: 1796
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 14 times in 12 posts
Gender: Country:
Re: Complexity and Intelligence
Thealogian: Are we not supposed to be Stewards of the earth, according to the Christian stories?
The New Testament abounds in earthy language, watery images, vegetal metaphors, and deep intimacy/indentification with the animal kingdom. For example, Jesus is called bread, wine, water, light, vine, lion and lamb of God; as is the Spirit of God described as a dove.
Quote:The National Religious Partnership for the Environment is an association of independent faith groups across a broad spectrum: the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the National Council of Churches U.S.A., the Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life, and the Evangelical Environmental Network.
Joined: Aug 2003 Posts: 1796
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 14 times in 12 posts
Gender: Country:
Re: Complexity and Intelligence
Thealogian: but what it (Creation story) implies, by placing humans at the center of the unfolding story of Life on earth, is just anthropocentric...
The Bible has multiple "creation stories" including the two in Genesis, and none of them, as I see it, paint an entirely anthropomorphic portrait of existence. Gen 1 - 2:3 reaches final crescendo with declaring the Sabbath "holy", leading towards a way of life that takes rest seriously: setting time aside, apart from the busy work-day world of tilling the soil and subduing the beasts, to cease working and let creation "be". Whereas all of creation, heaven and earth, humans and other living beings share in the identification of being "good"; the Sabbath day is blessed and called "holy".
Gen. 2:3-25 describes humanity as dirt and soil, brought out of the earth, like the rest of the creatures.
Job 38- 41:34 is the exact opposite of an anthropomorphic cosmology; God pulls no punches in portraying creation as something inexplicably complex, a monstrous abyss in relation to the miniscule demands and tiny concerns of humanity.
Psalm 74:13-17 is entirely theocentric, highlighting the central, active and directing role of God in creation.
Thealogian: So what good is this story pointing us towards, anyway? To paint a picture of humans as an extension of God's hand on earth? To give us the hubris to act as we like, since we've got the support of a Creator and saved soul to back us?
I'm not certain if we can point to one single good by way of these mutliple stories and references to God's creation in the Bible; nor do I think it terribly fruitful to place too much weight on any general interpretation that forces them into a single conclusion.
I don't think the Bible provides a simple or obvious "explanation" or "description" of the origin and development of existence...it is not a coherent theory or set of hypotheses to be proven or disproven. I'm not convinced that anyone knows what to do with these texts: aside from personal taste or allegience to tradition.
Joined: Jun 2004 Posts: 3552 Location: NJ
Thanks: 1 Thanked: 5 times in 5 posts
Gender: Country:
Re: Complexity and Intelligence
Mad:
Quote:But beginning with Darwin himself, proponents of evolutionary theory have interpreted the ideas of natural selection and evolution to favor certain value claims. It seems there's a certain allure for using evolutionary theory as a prop for ideology
Please expand on this. It was never my understanding that most contemporary evolutionists imbued evolution or NS with any teleological/ideological goal...even Darwin. Or am I misunderstanding you?
If you are referring to Social Darwinism...I think most reject that...and it had nothing to do with Darwin.
Mr. P.
The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.
The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"
I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper
Joined: Jun 2004 Posts: 3552 Location: NJ
Thanks: 1 Thanked: 5 times in 5 posts
Gender: Country:
Re: Complexity and Intelligence
Dissident:
Quote:The Bible has multiple "creation stories" including the two in Genesis, and none of them, as I see it, paint an entirely anthropomorphic portrait of existence.
Well, since the creation stories paint the picture of the creation of MAN, I think it is anthropocentric, as theologian said...(not anthropomorphic). I do not see the stories going into how a cow and a bull went into a garden and the cow caused the pair to get tossed out by eating a Forbidden Cud.
Mr. P.
The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.
The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"
I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper
Joined: Aug 2003 Posts: 1796
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 14 times in 12 posts
Gender: Country:
Re: Complexity and Intelligence
Mr. P: Well, since the creation stories paint the picture of the creation of MAN, I think it is anthropocentric, as theologian said...(not anthropomorphic).
My mistype misplaced morphic for centric...a very anthropos thing to do.....
Still, since my exegesis painted a larger, more diverse population on the creation canvas, locating humanity as one element among many, I'm not sure why you insist upon a monochromatic scheme.
Mr. P: I do not see the stories going into how a cow and a bull went into a garden and the cow caused the pair to get tossed out by eating a Forbidden Cud.
Again, that is just one of the stories, and it seems to point towards consequences that follow when humanity misuses creation: strife, enmity, alienation, isolation, etc..
Joined: Oct 2004 Posts: 3718 Images: 3 Location: California Highscores:1 Thanks: 347 Thanked: 747 times in 562 posts
Gender: Country:
Re: Complexity and Intelligence
It seems my brain is still in first gear after being away for a while... Mad, could you expand on this sentence a bit, I'm having trouble understanding the concept.
"The Origin of Species" does, however, contain passages that support a value-based interpretation of natural selection"
What is a value based interpretation of natural selection? Value according to whom? What kind of value? Isn't value a man made 'lens' through which we judge our world? If so, then it would seem that the objectivity of Darwins' perspective would be in question then. No scientist can be purely objective, however, huh?
Joined: Nov 2004 Posts: 2557 Location: decentralized
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Re: Complexity and Intelligence
Interbane: Mad, could you expand on this sentence a bit, I'm having trouble understanding the concept.
I believe I can, but I don't have my resources with me at the moment, so it'll have to wait.
What is a value based interpretation of natural selection?
An interpretation that derives values from, or reads them into, the otherwise deductive theory of evolution. For instance, most attempts to read evolution as linear, that is, as having a "direction" which is, in some certain sense, "progressive" -- for instance, the ethical evolutionary theories of Huxley and Waddington -- typically function by reading certain values into evolution. And the ultimate goal of such theories is usually to derive ethical values from a purely descriptive theory.
Value according to whom?
Value in the sense of abstract ideals. When I'm talking about values, I'm talking about concepts that lie outside the province of science. Behavioral sciences can describe altruism, to take a popular example, as a behavior, and can chart it according to whatever variables, but they cannot arrive at altruism in the same way that a purely ethical theory would.
Isn't value a man made 'lens' through which we judge our world?
Probably, although Wielenberg has demonstrated the difficulty in maintaining a broadly applicable ethical system from purely subjective values.
If so, then it would seem that the objectivity of Darwins' perspective would be in question then. No scientist can be purely objective, however, huh?
So far as I know, Darwin never really argues for value in evolutionary theory. There are simply certain comments that imply that the distinction is not, for him, always as clear-cut as he tries to maintain it. I don't think that's much of a criticism of Darwin, really, particularly given how brazen his followers have been in making the supposed relationship between ethics and evolution unavoidably explicit.
Joined: Nov 2004 Posts: 2557 Location: decentralized
Thanks: 0 Thanked: 0 time in 0 post
Gender:
Re: Complexity and Intelligence
My current position is that it's reasonable, and perhaps even imperative, to take evolution into account when it's clear that an ethical problem directly involves evolution. For example, a consideration of evolutionary theory may have some place in determining the ethics of, say, eugenics or cloning. That said, I can see no support for the claim made by some writers -- Waddington, for instance -- that evolution can serve as a reliable or even reasonable basis for determining or prefering and entire system of ethics. And that objection can be made more general by extending it to say that science, as it stands in its post-Cartesian fomulation, provides no secure foundation on which to build an ethical system.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
Love to talk about books but don't have time for our book discussion forums? For casual book talk join us on Facebook.
Support BookTalk.org
BookTalk.org is being upgraded to a totally new design. This upgrade is expensive. Any support would be VERY helpful! See who supports us.
Make a donation
PEOPLE PAYING FOR OUR UPGRADE:
• afv - $10 May
• LevV - $50 March
• Dexter - $10 March
• supernova38 - $25 March
• Oblivion - $20 March
• jheimlich - $20 February
• Robert Tulip - $50 February
• giselle - $50 January
Children here need worming
regularly, and I think I
need to buy more worming
tablets, so while my friends
sit on the beach, I have to
catch bush taxis up to the… more
The children have a long way
to walk to the nearest primary
school. At the moment they are
in temporary accommodation,
with volunteer teachers. There
is community land available,
a… more
The price of The 12th Disciple
has been updated to $3.99 for
Kindle readers. The book is
still available for free to
borrow for Amazon Prime
members. To be
competitive, and s… more
The 12th Disciple has been
reviewed by two different
people on Amazon. They
purchased the Kindle edition;
one in the US, one in the
UK. One review was
5-stars (US) and the oth… more
I'd like to say I've
been reading Harry Potter
since the day the world renown
series appeared on the
scene. Unfortunately,
the truth is I began reading
Harry Potter… more
Easter teaches many of us the
importance of redemption and
resurrection. Regardless of
what faith people follow, the
story of Jesus Christ has been
told in many languages in many
c… more
Our Book Talk will begin on
Wednesday, May 2nd. I look
forward to hearing about your
learning and classroom
experiences with Number Talks
as it all unfolds...
NONOPPOSITIONAL NONVIOLENCE
“The minute you conquer the
fear of death, at that moment
you are free. I submit to you
that if a man hasnÂ’t
discovered something that he
will die f… more
Yesterday, when I went to feed
Jeni the donkey, I noticed
swarms of bees entering
EbrimaÂ’s house through the
cracks in the door. We both
had a look, but he didnÂ’t
open his door… more
Whether you want to implement
number talks but are unsure of
how to begin or have
experience but want more
guidance in crafting
purposeful problems, this
dynamic multimedia resourc… more
Do you feel entitled? For
years I have listened to and,
in some instances, complained
that some people in America
feel entitled. For years I
have watched as these people
are portra… more
On Fat Tuesday and Ash
Wednesday of 2012, The 12th
Disciple was free to Kindle
users on both days. In all,
about 550 worldwide Kindle
users downloaded a copy of the
book.
‘Sacred Are the Brave’ a
collection of short stories
about the nonviolent
revolutions 1986-1989 is now
available in Kindle. Each of
the nine stories has
characters who are just
… more
The Weekend TrippersÂ’ is the
true story of Rfn Ted Taylor
and his part in the heroic
last stand in Calais May 1940.
The Weekend Trippers is based
on TedÂ’s diaries written at
the… more
Tell your friends when to meet you in the BookTalk.org Chat Room.
If you enjoy business bestsellers and would like to expand your business knowledge check out the quality book summaries offered by the world's leading book summary company.
BookTalk.org is a free book discussion group or online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a group. We host live author chats where booktalk members can interact with and interview authors. We give away free books to our members in book giveaway contests. Our booktalks are open to everybody who enjoys talking about books. Our book forums include book reviews, author interviews and book resources for readers and book lovers. Discussing books is our passion. We're a literature forum, or reading forum. Register a free book club account today! Suggest nonfiction and fiction books. Authors and publishers are welcome to advertise their books or ask for an author chat or author interview.
Tweet This Topic
