Intelligent Design: Evolution 2.0

[+Sherapy]

41 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Unfortunately some do, another example of why this thread is stagnating, they don’t want to hear anything that doesn’t support their belief. 

cormac

I know and it is so easily rectified, a basic academic based understanding of Scientific testing would do the job, perhaps just a bit of critical thinking too

Sheldrake came up with the best possible explanation that a dog meets the owner at the door is because the dog is psychic, it was at this point he became a "brand" to sell books instead of a man of Science to actually take serious. IMHO

 

Edited February 24, 2018 by Sherapy

[Illyrius]

Just now, jmccr8 said:

Hi Illyrius

I am likely more dependent on my animal instincts then many others and am thankful for it.

I had a cat that would steal bread out of the cupboard and at one point needed to have a right front leg removed due to an infection. He taught on of the kittens to do it for him and when I caught them he played the duck trying to look innocent and when I spoke to him about it he expressed guilt.

jmccr8

Animal nature is a part of us too. I am not so sure animals feel guilt, they would need a moral judgement for that. I think he more sensed you were angry or something and it felt bad cus he felt no whiskas for him. I know about cats haha.

[jmccr8]

2 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

Animal nature is a part of us too. I am not so sure animals feel guilt, they would need a moral judgement for that. I think he more sensed you were angry or something and it felt bad cus he felt no whiskas for him. I know about cats haha.

Hi Illyrius

Lol, spend enough time on a farm working with animals and you will see their personalities.

jmccr8

[stereologist]

3 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

Yes.. now i get what you mean. I don't know exactly what is the starting point. We differ from animals clearly in many respects. We are able to think and self reflect, i would say that evolution is showing advancement of forms through time, at what point and how we bacame human and able to self reflect and became conscious on this level.. i don't know. You are asking tough questions

Intelligent design is evident to me only when i look at the complexity and order of the universe, these details of how and why are what we are are pretty tough.

What do you think about it?

Evolution is not advancement. It is not goal directed. I believe other animals are able to do many of things that people only assign to humans. Gorillas using sign language can construct new thoughts not taught to them. There is the suggestion that they are not only self aware, but also can self reflect.

The universe is complex. A few rules controlling particle interactions leads to many different forms. Is this complexity real or is it just hard for humans to understand which is why humans in general are awed by the universe?

I see no evidence at all for intelligent design. As I mentioned before with respect to evolution, the universe can be explained without the need for  designer making a designer and intelligent design an extraneous hypothesis.

[Illyrius]

Just now, jmccr8 said:

Hi Illyrius

Lol, spend enough time on a farm working with animals and you will see their personalities.

jmccr8

I know my cats are different, but i would not call that personalites.. they do vary greatly.. i agree.

[stereologist]

6 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

Animal nature is a part of us too. I am not so sure animals feel guilt, they would need a moral judgement for that. I think he more sensed you were angry or something and it felt bad cus he felt no whiskas for him. I know about cats haha.

You haven't seen my dog. You come home and she is hanging her head knowing that whatever she did is not going to be accepted.

[Illyrius]

3 minutes ago, stereologist said:

You haven't seen my dog. You come home and she is hanging her head knowing that whatever she did is not going to be accepted.

Cats and dogs live among humans for a very long time so some kind of bond is formed for sure.. Cats are more indepenent and more intuitive.. dogs can be extremely sensitive to emotions of the owner and are far more bonded to owner.

Edited February 24, 2018 by Illyrius

[stereologist]

10 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

Cats and dogs live among humans for a very long time so some kind of bond is formed for sure.. Cats are more indepenent and more intuitive.. dogs can be extremely sensitive to emotions of the owner and are far more bonded to owner.

So dogs feel guilt? I suggest they do.

[I'mConvinced]

What do people make of the recent news that Neanderthals produced art? This was one of the last things that separated how advanced they had become compared to modern humans. It's looking like they were at least our equal in intelligence.

If this is true then an entire species of extremely self-aware hominids has already been wiped from this Earth and perhaps they weren't the only ones. It is things like this that have always turned me off from the idea that we alone are/were 'special' in some mystical sense.

[SHaYap]

Koko says ...

~

 

[00.04:41]

~

 

[00.02:45]

 

~
 

Quote

 

~

Frans de Waal: Moral behavior in animals | TED Talk - TED.com

▶ 16:52

https://www.ted.com/talks/frans_de_waal_do_animals_have_morals

 

What happens when two monkeys are paid unequally? Fairness, reciprocity, empathy, cooperation -- caring ...

~

 

~

It seems someone somewhere wasn't intelligently designed to know something any better ...

~

 

[Harte]

6 hours ago, Crazy Horse said:

That depends if you have it on a hard copy or not.

 

We know that paper will survive the "death" of a computer - an entirely separate pile of material.

What about the program installed in the computer? Does it still run on some "astral plane?"

Harte

[Harte]

6 hours ago, Crazy Horse said:

Why would I believe that? I understand cause and effect very well, I live by this ideal everyday..

But when we approach more subjective ideas, then things get more "shady". For example, I lose a ten-spot and you find it, good for you, not so great for me. And then there this idea that humanity are both unique and the same, so yes, two different truths can occupy the same space. Or this idea that you must be either a theist or anti-theist. Its divisive.

This idea of either, or, is limiting our perception of life.

Theres a thread about this subject around here someplace, I did try and look for it..

Prior to the adoption of the scientific method, originating with Aristotle (in many ways,) it was commonly thought that flies simply formed out of rotting meat.

Experimentation proved otherwise in one of the earliest truly scientific experiments.

That's why.

Harte

[Harte]

5 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

Energy is thing, mind is meaning.

 

It would seem that some minds are meaningless.

Minds only have meaning if they are used.

Harte

[Harte]

5 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

Mind can imagine.

Computers and their software are the result of the imaginations of mind.

 

Mind is alive.

Machines, computers and software are not.

A computer can be programmed to imagine.

Harte

[Will Due]

Just now, Harte said:

A computer can be programmed to imagine.

Harte

 

Not on this planet

 

 

[Illyrius]

2 minutes ago, Harte said:

A computer can be programmed to imagine.

Harte

Can you provide a link about this?

[Will Due]

2 minutes ago, Harte said:

A computer can be programmed to imagine.

Harte

 

Based on that statement, I'll no longer take serious anything else you say.

 

 

[Harte]

3 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Not on this planet

There's at least one computer on this planet that would beg to differ:

Quote

This landscape may not look like that much - it's a solid B+ in middle school art, I'd say - but this might just be proof that its creator, a computer program named the Painting Fool, is a creative being.

The program is the brainchild of Dr. Simon Colton, a computer scientist at Imperial College London. This is one of dozens of paintings by the Painting Fool, and it's particularly exciting because the program wasn't working from an existing digital image, as it usually does. Instead, this is actually a set of images that sprang from the AI equivalent of imagination. And when the program does work from a preexisting image, the results are even more impressive in more traditional aesthetic terms, as you can see in this video and at its website.

https://io9.gizmodo.com/5879423/a-computer-program-painted-this-artwork-from-its-own-imagination

Harte

Edited February 24, 2018 by Harte

[SHaYap]

Page 86 and still stuck in circa 1859/1860
 

Quote

 

~

The Huxley Wilberforce Debate - Darwin Day

darwinday.org/educate/oxforddebate/

The debate was dominated by its two individuals: Thomas Huxley and Bishop Samuel Wilberforce. Huxley, nicknamed “Darwin's Bulldog,” was a biologist and an avid defender of Darwin's 1859 Origin of Species. Wilberforce, also called “Soapy Sam” for his “greasy” demeanor, was the Bishop of Oxford and a proponent of ...

~

Wilberforce and Huxley: A Legendary Encounter

users.ox.ac.uk/~jrlucas/legend.html

The legend of the encounter between Wilberforce and Huxley is well established. Almost every scientist knows, and every viewer of the BBC's recent programme on Darwin was shown, how Samuel Wilberforce, bishop of Oxford, attempted to pour scorn on Darwin's Origin of Species at a meeting of the British Association in ...

~

Jonathan Smith, “The Huxley-Wilberforce 'Debate' on Evolution, 30 ...

www.branchcollective.org/?ps_articles=jonathan-smith-the-huxley-wilberforce...

The “debate” over evolution between T. H. Huxley and Bishop Samuel Wilberforce at the 1860 meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in Oxford is an iconic story in the history of evolution and, indeed, in the history of the conflict between science and religion, second only to Galileo's troubles with ...

~

 

~

 

[00.04:26]

~

[Illyrius]

5 minutes ago, Harte said:

There's at least one computer on this planet that would beg to differ:

https://io9.gizmodo.com/5879423/a-computer-program-painted-this-artwork-from-its-own-imagination

Harte

Are you sure it is imagination or is it just a set of instructions a bit randomized?

[Harte]

2 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

Are you sure it is imagination or is it just a set of instructions a bit randomized?

Can you think of any way to differentiate these two things with any certainty?

Harte

[Harte]

11 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Based on that statement, I'll no longer take serious anything else you say.

Most of what I say isn't very serious, but that one was.

Harte

[Will Due]

1 minute ago, Harte said:

Most of what I say isn't very serious, but that one was.

Harte

 

Have you ever programmed a computer?

 

 

[Illyrius]

1 minute ago, Harte said:

Can you think of any way to differentiate these two things with any certainty?

Harte

Lets see.. if i give this computer an insturction to paint me eifel's tower blended like a picture of a Salvador Dali to make a double image with a woman which has a mystic smile in light shade and a mixture of pterodactil and xenobear are floating over everything, will this computer be able to do this, or will he paint me a few lines which look like trees?

[Harte]

Just now, Will Due said:

 

Have you ever programmed a computer?

Technology has passed me by, but I was once pretty good with Basic and was damn good with Fortran.

Both are today obsolete though.

Harte