Comment on Dennett's Vid

17 Guests, 0 Users

In America, through pressure of conformity, there is freedom of choice, but nothing to choose from. ~ Peter Ustinov

Advanced search

Dilber MulticolorMarley TPSMF Default Theme -

[Francis]

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/dan_dennett_cute_sexy_sweet_funny.html

Darwin’s theory gives us a compelling explanation for the view of evolution as a blind and random process that has no deliberate agenda behind it. Much of the diversity that we see in the natural world can be explained by this random and senseless process and, by Occam’s razor, we needn’t invoke supernatural influences if we can explain what we see without them. God is dead.


However, I think that Dennett has a blind spot. The blind soulless mechanism that Darwin’s theory points to is only a facade, superimposed over a more fundamental deliberately designed structure. If you splash through a puddle accidently in your car there will be a random pattern of water spots on the side of your car. From that, can we infer by extrapolation that the car itself could arise by accident, without the intervention of a careful and painstaking design and construction process, just as the spots on the fender did? I don’t think so.

Computers can be set up to generate random numbers and these can be mapped to make an apparently random type of ‘abstract’ art. But this whole thing has to be set up first. The computer and the algorithms won’t arise spontaneously by any type of random goalless process.
The random and fickle nature of evolution and its trend toward arbitrary diversity is merely a façade superimposed over a prior unity. Yes, part of the process of life is random and agenda-less, but that part is not the whole process. My view is that God makes the rules and calls the plays, but God does not choreograph the plays. It’s like sports; we have rules and officials, but the plays are made up of the random interactions that vary widely from game to game, depending on a million uncontrolled variables. But all this is still occurring within the confines of the controlled and designed variables; rules and officials, which are both prerequisite and non-random.
We crave sweets and sex because sugar and sex are, or at least were, helpful for survival. But why do we crave survival? Don’t fugue, it’s a real question.

[Jana]

We crave survival cause that is what we know, we don't crave death because we don't know death...if we knew death, we may crave death.

[Francis]

There is no rigorous way to address this argument. Behe has fallen flat, as I have with my hand-waving, anecdotal missive above. Likewise have the opponents on the other side of it. I admit to falling victim to the fear of a meaningless and utterly chaotic Universe. Perhaps we create patterns, implying that they're not really there unless we project them onto the chaos.  But I come at it from the other angle; we create (project) chaos because we cannot discern any patterns. As I like to say; chaos is a state of mind, not a state of nature. Perhaps I have it backwards. Who was it that said: The only serious philosophical question is whether or not to commit suicide?