The purpose behind causation

[Interbane]

Here is an interesting clip that shows drops of water acting like intelligent agents. Yet the only mechanism at play is varying evaporation rates. It's interesting how our minds see purpose where there actually isn't purpose.

http://gizmodo.com/these-colorful-liqui ... 731/+Fahey

[ant]

It's interesting how our minds see purpose where there actually isn't purpose.

Thanks for your insight about those drops of water.

Was there any purpose to your post here?

I guess those drops of water will never reproduce huh?

do you predict any of those drops of water developing into autonomous purposeful agents in the next 4 billions years - give or take a billion years?

[Interbane]

I guess those drops of water will never reproduce huh?

I don't know, what do you think?

do you predict any of those drops of water developing into autonomous purposeful agents in the next 4 billions years - give or take a billion years?

I don't know, what do you think?

[youkrst]

It's interesting how our minds see purpose where there actually isn't purpose.

yeah, straight away i thought, oh look the little blue one is pushing the big round yellow one, how cute!

ant, are you trying to be like socrates? the gadfly thing, asking questions to provoke someone to see where they might be going wrong.

because if you are, i thought i should point out that what is endearing in a socrates is really counter productive on a message board forum.

[geo]

That's really cool, Interbane. It shows the kind of natural sorting and clumping that takes place without purpose (obviously). Molecules already with a kind of capacity for locomotion.

[Interbane]

That part is cool, and I think it has something to do with ant's odd comments. But what I was trying to point out is that when you watch the video, your mind "interprets" the action as having purpose. It's linked to agency detection in some manner. We see purpose where there is no purpose. We see intention where there is no intention. Theists mock the insistence that much of what we see or believe is illusory. But much of what we see or believe truly is illusory. We operate in this world via heuristics, not only in reasoning, but visually as well. We see false patterns, false purpose, false agency.

[geo]

The illusion of purpose probably stems in part from our every day observations of movement. Animals move to find food and shelter, and even plants move towards the light. We come to expect that any movement is linked to purpose. And I suppose these molecule clumps can be seen as having some purpose. The clumping tends to lead toward a more stable organization of molecules.

Ant mentioned something about "autonomous purposeful agents." But just how autonomous and purposeful are humans really? There's a philosophical question.

[Flann 5]

The illusion of purpose probably stems in part from our every day observations of movement. Animals move to find food and shelter, and even plants move towards the light. We come to expect that any movement is linked to purpose. And I suppose these molecule clumps can be seen as having some purpose. The clumping tends to lead toward a more stable organization of molecules.

Ant mentioned something about "autonomous purposeful agents." But just how autonomous and purposeful are humans really? There's a philosophical question.

Hi Geo, Difficult questions alright.
Is it all illusion of purpose?
Certain underlying assumptions may be at play here.
In seeking to respond to the kinds of explanations offered by such as Dennett and Dawkins, I found this essay critiqueing their explanations on this subject.
Stephen L Talbott in his essay titled; Evolution and the illusion of Randomness, questions the appeal to the concept of randomness itself as indicator of purposelessness, and evolutionary "fitness" which seem to be lynchpins of the view of purpose as illusion.
I'm a bit out of my depth technically and will probably have to study the essay more to get my own head around the issues.
For what it's worth here's Talbott's essay.
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publicati ... randomness

[Interbane]

evolutionary "fitness" which seem to be lynchpins of the view of purpose as illusion

The lynchpin is human tendency to see purpose where there is none. The article I linked demonstrates this. Don't you feel yourself "observing" purpose in the moving water while watching the video? I certainly do. We're trained to see purpose, because to err on the side of not seeing purpose is to miss the plotting foe or stalking predator. We've evolved the tendency to err on the side of false positives with regards to determining purpose.

What you see in evolution are indicators that this "purpose-bias" exists there as well. This isn't to say that organisms with a complex enough nervous system don't have purpose. The word would be meaningless without an instance of it. But to see purpose elsewhere is false attribution.

[Interbane]

But just how autonomous and purposeful are humans really?

It depends on how much power you grant to the words. Does "purpose" mean intention that comes from an unknown/supernatural source? I don't hold the word to that definition. Although my end purpose may be the resulting culmination of a thousand various inputs, it is still a purpose/product only able to be achieved by going through that process - by the information processing of my brain. It's still my purpose, as I'm the causal nexus that is required for the output. I have a goal, even if my goal is decided within a causal web.

The same is true of autonomy. It isn't that an autonomous agent is driven by a supernatural/metaphysical force, but that the causal inputs are too numerous and subtle to be traced. Even though the agent is the clear "source" of autonomy, the truth is the agent is a middle man, a causal nexus. The myriad source causes can't be seen except in the most obvious cases, so the agent is considered the source. It's illusory here as well, but the words still hold their legacy definitions.

The words don't change, but they do gain dimension.