Another way to look at evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-04-2013, 03:14 PM
RE: Another way to look at evolution
Not only do you not understand evolution, you also don't understand computers. Lovely.

Watson is an intellect the way a library is an intellect. In that it isn't.

E 2 = (mc 2)2 + (pc )2
614C → 714N + e + ̅νe
2 K(s) + 2 H2O(l) → 2 KOH(aq) + H2 (g) + 196 kJ/mol
It works, bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2013, 03:41 PM
RE: Another way to look at evolution
(18-04-2013 03:14 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  Not only do you not understand evolution, you also don't understand computers. Lovely.

Watson is an intellect the way a library is an intellect. In that it isn't.

Your error is that you are conflating the evolutionary process with evolutionary systems.

Also Watson is a bit more inteeligent then a library. A library can't interpet a question while Watson can.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2013, 03:47 PM
RE: Another way to look at evolution
(18-04-2013 03:41 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(18-04-2013 03:14 PM)Phaedrus Wrote:  Not only do you not understand evolution, you also don't understand computers. Lovely.

Watson is an intellect the way a library is an intellect. In that it isn't.

Your error is that you are conflating the evolutionary process with evolutionary systems. Combustion is a process that does not require an intellect, but an engine is a system that does. Instead of just making a baseless accusation that I don't "understand" how about you make a real argument, or give an example of an evolutionary system whose origins are known that did not require an intellect. How about you say something of substance.

Also Watson is a bit more intelligent then a library. A library can't interpet a question while Watson can.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2013, 03:48 PM
RE: Another way to look at evolution
(18-04-2013 02:08 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(18-04-2013 11:57 AM)Ghost Wrote:  I'm done here,

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt

Shucks.....I have a tremendous amount of respect for you Matt especially with respect to your knowledge about evoution. I was really hoping you would comment on this other way of looking at evolution.

To anyone else reading this thread: I have thought for a few years now that perhaps the biological evolutionary system of which we are products required intellect because it seems every evolutionary systems whose origins are known require intellect.

Now I believe the counter argument would be that logically there must be at least one instance of an evolutionary system coming into existence without intellect. However that counter argument depends on an assumption that intellects can only come into existence via an evolutionary process. I believe that IBMs Watson machine proves such an assumption to be false. It has been proven that intellects don't necessarily need to come into existence via evolution.

Watson is not an intellect.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2013, 03:50 PM
RE: Another way to look at evolution
(18-04-2013 03:48 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-04-2013 02:08 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Shucks.....I have a tremendous amount of respect for you Matt especially with respect to your knowledge about evoution. I was really hoping you would comment on this other way of looking at evolution.

To anyone else reading this thread: I have thought for a few years now that perhaps the biological evolutionary system of which we are products required intellect because it seems every evolutionary systems whose origins are known require intellect.

Now I believe the counter argument would be that logically there must be at least one instance of an evolutionary system coming into existence without intellect. However that counter argument depends on an assumption that intellects can only come into existence via an evolutionary process. I believe that IBMs Watson machine proves such an assumption to be false. It has been proven that intellects don't necessarily need to come into existence via evolution.

Watson is not an intellect.

Chas do you believe that intellect can only originate via an evolutionary process? If you do not then my point still stands even if you reject my example of intellect producing intellect.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2013, 03:56 PM
RE: Another way to look at evolution
(18-04-2013 03:50 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(18-04-2013 03:48 PM)Chas Wrote:  Watson is not an intellect.

Chas do you believe that intellect can only originate via an evolutionary process? If you do not then my point still stands even if you reject my example of intellect producing intellect.

No. I believe our intelligence came about through evolution. It is an emergent property of our brains.

We will someday create an intelligence, but that day is not yet here. We may even create it using an evolutionary algorithm.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2013, 04:13 PM
RE: Another way to look at evolution
(18-04-2013 03:56 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-04-2013 03:50 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Chas do you believe that intellect can only originate via an evolutionary process? If you do not then my point still stands even if you reject my example of intellect producing intellect.

No. I believe our intelligence came about through evolution. It is an emergent property of our brains.

We will someday create an intelligence, but that day is not yet here. We may even create it using an evolutionary algorithm.

I too believe our intellect is a product of an evolutionary system. I also believe all evolutionary systems are the products of intellect. I base this belief on the fact that every evolutionary system whose origins are known have been found to be products of intellect. So I have no reason to believe that the evolutionary system which produced us, whose origin is unknown, is not the product of an intellect. I reject the argument that there must have been at one time an evolutionary system that did not require an intellect on the basis that intellects can exist outside an evolutionary process and can come into existence outside an evolutionary system.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2013, 04:31 PM
RE: Another way to look at evolution
(18-04-2013 04:13 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(18-04-2013 03:56 PM)Chas Wrote:  No. I believe our intelligence came about through evolution. It is an emergent property of our brains.

We will someday create an intelligence, but that day is not yet here. We may even create it using an evolutionary algorithm.

I too believe our intellect is a product of an evolutionary system. I also believe all evolutionary systems are the products of intellect. I base this belief on the fact that every evolutionary system whose origins are known have been found to be products of intellect. So I have no reason to believe that the evolutionary system which produced us, whose origin is unknown, is not the product of an intellect. I reject the argument that there must have been at one time an evolutionary system that did not require an intellect on the basis that intellects can exist outside an evolutionary process and can come into existence outside an evolutionary system.

The system of evolution of which we are a product has not been shown to be a product of intellect. There is no evidence of that.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2013, 05:36 PM (This post was last modified: 18-04-2013 05:43 PM by Heywood Jahblome.)
RE: Another way to look at evolution
(18-04-2013 04:31 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(18-04-2013 04:13 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I too believe our intellect is a product of an evolutionary system. I also believe all evolutionary systems are the products of intellect. I base this belief on the fact that every evolutionary system whose origins are known have been found to be products of intellect. So I have no reason to believe that the evolutionary system which produced us, whose origin is unknown, is not the product of an intellect. I reject the argument that there must have been at one time an evolutionary system that did not require an intellect on the basis that intellects can exist outside an evolutionary process and can come into existence outside an evolutionary system.

The system of evolution of which we are a product has not been shown to be a product of intellect. There is no evidence of that.

There is no evidence the last photon of light to strike your face traveled at c through a vacuum, yet we except it as fact that it does because every other photon we observed traveling thru a vacuum did so with a speed of c.

As you observe more and more evolutionary systems which are the products of intellect, and never observe evolutionary systems which are not the products of intellect, the more confident you can be of the claim that all evolutionary systems are the products of intellect.

Unless you have some direct evidence that the evoutionary system which produced us was not the product of an intellect, or unless you have some direct evidence of the exstence of evolutionary systems which did not require intellect, there is no substantive reason not to believe all evolutionary systems require intellect. The redoubt for atheism is the claim that logically there must have been an evoutioary system which came into existence without an intellect to generate all the subsequent evoutionary systems. This redoubt is founded on the weak assumption that only evolutionary systems can produce intellect....we have no reason to believe this assumption is true and many reasons to believe it is not true.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-04-2013, 05:43 PM
RE: Another way to look at evolution
(18-04-2013 05:36 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(18-04-2013 04:31 PM)Chas Wrote:  The system of evolution of which we are a product has not been shown to be a product of intellect. There is no evidence of that.

There is no evidence the last photon of light to strike your face traveled at c through a vacuum, yet we except it as fact that it does because every other photon we observed traveling thru a vacuum did so with a speed of c.

As you observe more and more evolutionary systems which are the products of intellect, and never observe evolutionary systems which are not the products of intellect, the more confident you can be of the claim that all evolutionary systems are the products of intellect.

Unless you have some direct evidence that the evoutionary system which produced us was not the product of an intellect, or unless you have some direct evidence of the exstence of evolutionary systems which did not require intellect, there is no substantive reason not to believe all evolutionary systems require intellect.

I don't know what evolutionary systems you are talking about except man-made simulations of evolution.

There is no evidence of intellect in biological evolution. You are making a claim, provide evidence.

Your understanding of burden of proof is flawed.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: