Seeking more help vs Christian YouTuber
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-05-2015, 06:47 PM (This post was last modified: 19-05-2015 06:59 PM by Tomasia.)
RE: Seeking more help vs Christian YouTuber
(19-05-2015 01:31 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  So not every animal is capable of human intelligence, but intelligence itself is hardly unique. We see the awareness of self and other problem solving capabilities in our Great Ape cousins, and almost all mammals display varying levels of intelligence; some of which are quite impressive (dolphins, pigs, and elephants come to mind).

When was the last time a dolphin wrote a novel? Understood evolution, and how they developed over billions of years, or how the universe they were a product of came to be?

Do you imagine that one day in the distant future that dolphins, pigs, or elephants will develop to the extent we have, and be capable of the same things we are now? That eventually some sort of ecological niche would arise for them, and allow them to develop our reasoning and creative capacities?

Human intelligence, in it's capacities, and reasoning abilities are entirely unique, entirely one-off, a fluke occurrence, quite unlikely to ever be repeated.

Quote:And yet the universe is old and massive, and rare statistically improbable occurrences happen all the fucking time. Our chances of finding similarly intelligent life are almost non existent, but there almost certainly exists more intelligent life out in the galaxy, let alone the universe.

Yea, I doubt that. We can barely find life on other planets, and even if we did find life on other planet, in some other galaxy, the chances of that life being even remotely intelligent as human beings, let alone more intelligent, is slim to none. We don't even believe that over time other animals on our own planet would independently develop our level of intelligence. We truly are a freak occurrence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2015, 06:56 PM
RE: Seeking more help vs Christian YouTuber
(19-05-2015 06:47 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(19-05-2015 01:31 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  So not every animal is capable of human intelligence, but intelligence itself is hardly unique. We see the awareness of self and other problem solving capabilities in our Great Ape cousins, and almost all mammals display varying levels of intelligence; some of which are quite impressive (dolphins, pigs, and elephants come to mind).

When was the last time a Dolphin wrote a novel? Understood evolution, and how they developed over billions of years, or how the universe they were a product of came to be?

Do you imagine that one day in the distant future that dolphins, pigs, or elephants will develop to the extent we have, and be capable of the same things we are now? That eventually some sort of ecological niche would arise for them, and allow them to develop our reasoning and creative capacities?

Human intelligence, in it's capacities, and reasoning abilities are entirely unique, entirely one-off, a fluke occurrence, quite unlikely to ever be repeated.

And I base this only on knowing that humans did it but not knowing how actual likely it could be, what the actual thought capabilities of current dolphins are and how the potential for intelligence of a high degree without manual dexterity would work... Yes we're biased to make it SEEM that way, but it's actually a great question unanswerable currently.

By the way, are you telling me this wasn't written by a Dolphin? [Image: 51mLZ1QIjmL._SX258_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg]

Oh and you really need to rethink an understanding of the Drake Equation and other factors of which lay within it.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2015, 07:15 PM (This post was last modified: 19-05-2015 07:22 PM by Tomasia.)
RE: Seeking more help vs Christian YouTuber
(19-05-2015 06:43 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  In a hominids evolving in an African setting area, no nothing there prevented any different species of Americas or Asias landscapes from growing a deeper intelligence, but perhaps they didn't have the direct competing situational factors or physiological makeup to make it... but perhaps they could of and might of done so in another 10 million years but Humans eventually reached out to that area and halted those potential situations.

Plenty of species had just the same amount of time as we had to develop our level on intelligence, long before we reached across the globe. Other animals have been able to live and survive without ever even needing the extent of our intellectual capacities, to continue to do so. No supposed ecological niche has ever arisen for other animals, the way such a niche supposedly existed for us, to develop our reasoning and creative abilities.

"We recognize convergences because unrelated species evolve similar traits. In other words, the traits appear in more than one species. But sophisticated, self-aware intelligence is a singleton: it evolved just once, in a human ancestor. (Octopi and dolphins are also smart, but they do not have the stuff to reflect on their origins.) In contrast, eyes have evolved independently forty times, and white color in Arctic animals appeared several times. It is hard to make a convincing case for the evolutionary inevitability of a feature that arose only once. " -Jerry Coyne

Your suggestion that if we didn't sprawl out to the extent we did, that given 10 million or so years, or even 100 millions years or so another species may have also developed our level of intelligence is not just unlikely, it's pretty improbable.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2015, 07:52 PM
RE: Seeking more help vs Christian YouTuber
(19-05-2015 07:15 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(19-05-2015 06:43 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  In a hominids evolving in an African setting area, no nothing there prevented any different species of Americas or Asias landscapes from growing a deeper intelligence, but perhaps they didn't have the direct competing situational factors or physiological makeup to make it... but perhaps they could of and might of done so in another 10 million years but Humans eventually reached out to that area and halted those potential situations.

Plenty of species had just the same amount of time as we had to develop our level on intelligence, long before we reached across the globe. Other animals have been able to live and survive without ever even needing the extent of our intellectual capacities, to continue to do so. No supposed ecological niche has ever arisen for other animals, the way such a niche supposedly existed for us, to develop our reasoning and creative abilities.

"We recognize convergences because unrelated species evolve similar traits. In other words, the traits appear in more than one species. But sophisticated, self-aware intelligence is a singleton: it evolved just once, in a human ancestor. (Octopi and dolphins are also smart, but they do not have the stuff to reflect on their origins.) In contrast, eyes have evolved independently forty times, and white color in Arctic animals appeared several times. It is hard to make a convincing case for the evolutionary inevitability of a feature that arose only once. " -Jerry Coyne

Your suggestion that if we didn't sprawl out to the extent we did, that given 10 million or so years, or even 100 millions years or so another species may have also developed our level of intelligence is not just unlikely, it's pretty improbable.

It's still such a loose factor of what you even are getting at when you use the term intelligence. There is no such defined factor, it's mainly a hypothetical construct. We have various types of intelligence or things we excel at with our brains factors. What is it that is "special" or significant even about it? We don't know that it's even not just a massive illusion that we have the types of conscious precognitive ideas.

For a species to be "what we are" in terms of how we view intelligence, it is highly improbable. To "reflect on their origins" is a bizarre concept we seem to hold. Who is to say there is anything special or grand about that though? WE ARE, well we are absolutely undeniably biased.

But that's the problem, viewing things in a box and a scope that we don't have a sliver of a clue to know if it's actually significant or not. They might have a great intelligence and ability to communicate and function on a high level we wouldn't comprehend, because we evolutionary aren't set up to comprehend that, we've turned up comprehending the way we do.

You have to grasp that our intelligence, way of functioning, communication, tool usage, are our biased manners of viewing things. We naturally judge in a biased manner of that sort but we have to try to observe it with as many what if's outside of that to be as objective as can be.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-05-2015, 08:29 PM
RE: Seeking more help vs Christian YouTuber
(19-05-2015 07:15 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  it's pretty improbable.

You keep using that word.....

Let's flip that "improbable" concept around for a minute. The way my mind works (and I admit that just like you I like to break things down because I too am a simple man) is to apply the same incredulity that you use towards naturalism to god.

For a being that is completely infinite, which has existed always outside of space and time to create us as we are is not only unlikely, but pretty improbable. First I ask why? What would the need be to create us if not just out of unbearable boredom or curiosity? But then if god is god, how could he be curious? He should know everything.

So we'll have to go with boredom, or whatever the deistic equivalent of boredom might be, I have no idea cus I'm not an eternal deity. Although I could imagine eternity could get a bit tedious for a self aware intelligence.

Then we have to consider the immensity and complexity of the cosmos, and we have to reconcile it to the thought that it was all somehow necessary in order to create us, as the speck of dust in the whole of existence that we are. And if it's not necessary, which it wouldn't be for a god, then it is completely arbitrary. We also have to consider the world that he created for us, and the incredibly stupid tendencies towards selfishness, jealousy and violence that he endowed us with. Why would he do that if not simply for entertainment value? I see no other reason to make the world the way that it is. Of course I'm not a deity, so I can't lean on my own understanding, but you get the picture.

I could go on and on, but what I'm trying to get at is the fact that if there existed a being with eternal and infinite attributes, the very fact that he/it has created us at all, especially in the manner that he did, is so completely arbitrary and needless, that I find it not only highly unlikely, but pretty improbable.

So when you posit an eternal creator, you're only creating a whole other list of things that need explaining. I would suggest that a theory that doesn't include such a being makes more sense. Wouldn't you?

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes evenheathen's post
20-05-2015, 04:40 AM
RE: Seeking more help vs Christian YouTuber
(19-05-2015 08:29 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(19-05-2015 07:15 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  it's pretty improbable.

You keep using that word.....

lol, in this case I'm borrowing the term from Jerry Coyne. But I'm going to provide two separate quotes here, and would like to hear which one you and others here are more inclined to side with:

The first quote:

"But as life re-explored adaptive space, could we be certain that our niche would not be occupied? I would argue that we could be almost certain that it would be–that eventually evolution would produce an intelligent, self-aware, reflective creature endowed with a nervous system large enough to solve the very same questions we have, and capable of discovering the very process that produced it, the process of evolution…. Everything we know about evolution suggests that it could, sooner or later, get to that niche.”

And the second quote, in which Jerry Coyne disagrees with this entirely:

" In fact, there are good reasons for thinking that the evolution of humanoids was not only not inevitable, but was a priori improbable. "

It seems like most people here, would side with the first quote more so than the second?

Quote:So when you posit an eternal creator, you're only creating a whole other list of things that need explaining. I would suggest that a theory that doesn't include such a being makes more sense. Wouldn't you?

I don't recall ever mentioning an eternal creator, or God at all here. In fact the argument I'm making is borrowing for an Atheists Biology Professor at the University of Chicago, Jerry Coyne.

I'm just saying if it all is true, than we'd sort have to recognize that our particular existence, particular in regards to our intellectual and reasoning capacities, is an improbable occurrence, we'd have to sort of acknowledge it as a fluke, unlikely to ever be repeated. While plenty of other features have developed in other species independently, like complex eyes, like the features of the marsupial flying phalanger, and flying squires, marsupial moles and placental moles, Tasmanian wolves and placental wolves, our sophisticated intellectual capacities, to be aware of our existence, and map it out to it's very beginning and shit, our creative capacities, are all one-off.

If you find that our our sense of awareness, and reasoning and creative abilities being a product of an improbable series of events, a fluke occurrence, extremely unlikely to occur again, to be a hard pill to swallow. That's your problem. Clearly other atheists, and an actual scientist, like Jerry Coyne, doesn't have a problem acknowledging that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2015, 05:08 AM
RE: Seeking more help vs Christian YouTuber
Quote:" In fact, there are good reasons for thinking that the evolution of humanoids was not only not inevitable, but was a priori improbable. "

It seems like most people here, would side with the first quote more so than the second?
Really? If you really think that about "most people here" you're continuing to not show an understanding of what is being mentioned in the language being discussed. You aren't going to until you stop judging and boxing in thoughts constantly.

Since you like to quote Jerry Coyne so much, it's rather interesting I just saw this scroll by on twitter. He has a new book coming out that reflects more on the subject of how evolution is reflective vs the views of religious inspiration in the role of evolution.

http://jerrycoyne.uchicago.edu/Faith-vs-Fact.html

Here is a sleeve like quote of Steven Pinkers ideas on the ideas of this book.

Quote:The truth is not always halfway between two extremes: some propositions are flat wrong. In this timely and important book, Jerry Coyne expertly exposes the incoherence of the increasingly popular belief that you can have it both ways: that God (or something God-ish, God-like, or God-oid) sort-of exists; that miracles kind-of happen; and that the truthiness of dogma is somewhat-a-little-bit-more-or-less-who's-to-say-it-isn't like the truths of science and reason.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2015, 05:18 AM
Seeking more help vs Christian YouTuber
Well, from what I gather from those disagreeing with me, the first quote, not the one you highlighted seems to be the one they are more inclined to agree with.

You could have just selected one, that you find more of an affinity to and just clarified if there are any minor differences.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2015, 05:20 AM (This post was last modified: 20-05-2015 05:28 AM by ClydeLee.)
RE: Seeking more help vs Christian YouTuber
(20-05-2015 05:18 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Well, from what I gather from those disagreeing with me, the first quote, not the one you highlighted seems to be the one they are more inclined to agree with.

You could have just selected one, that you find more of an affinity to and just clarified if there are any minor differences.

Ah, I thought you meant the quote split in it's half, but now i see it's just a comma... but the quotes are really no different. It's just a matter of, saying, yes it may happen with the factors in place but not denying it's still improbable. Basically everything that could happen has a degree of improbability to it of a large factor in evolutionary factors. Saying it's quite possible the factors exist is just saying it's true that the niche could be found, but it doesn't deny it still could be improbable.

But oddly it's like an enpass of what a person sees when judging a text. I guess you could say it's a minor difference or so but on a grand scale it's a perspective terminology issue. Yet it's similar where it's standing to saying, ah that's a biblical contradiction but others saying, no it's not at all. So it's a quirky grounding point.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-05-2015, 05:24 AM
Seeking more help vs Christian YouTuber
And as far as his new book is concerned, I'd likely pick up a copy, because I tend to like reading his science stuff, it's usually quite illuminating, unlike his particular take on religion, which is pretty negligible.

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: