Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Starboy · 02-25-2003, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Keith
No, I'm observing clear and obvious purpose and saying that it isn't due to a process that has no purpose. Even most six year-olds can tell you what an eye or ear is for. It is nonsense to say that eyes and ears "just happened" without a purpose.

Keith

Okay, maybe we are getting somewhere. The question 'Do eyes and ears have any purpose?' begs another question, 'Purpose for what and who?' Would eyes and ears have a purpose if they were on a rock?

Starboy

Principia · 02-25-2003, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Keith: If whatever bat ear we're discussing is composed of 300 different structures, all of which need to be working, and working together in order for the bat to survive, how did "nature" accomplish this? Through trial and error?

This has been answered multiple times, if not by me, by almost all of your responders: mutations and natural selection. Of course, whether or not "Nature" accomplished this depends on whether or not you care to personify Nature.

As to your claim that "300 different structures" (please offer us a source for this number) work "in order for the bat to survive" (once again, please show us that these 300 different structures are required for survival), one only needs to realize that all bats eventually die. 300 different structures don't seem to alter this eventuality. So, strangely enough, as we go back to your original question, survival doesn't seem to be the ultimate goal. Keeping this observation in mind, let's continue with...

Quote:

If it took more than a million years to develop such an ear to the current level of sophistication, how can tens of thousands of past stages of bat ear development just happen to not only have sustained the bat's survival, but also anticipated perfectly (at every stage) what the bat's future survival needs were?

Because you haven't met all of the other bats that haven't lived to reproduce. Yet, you keep talking about the bat, as though there has been only one continuous species that has existed since the dawn of time. Common misconception on your part.

I've taken the liberty to highlight for you the amount of incredulity you display despite your own ignorance. But your being merely dumbfounded does not help generate understanding nor science. So let's return to my question to you: How would you go about studying the development of bat ears? It has been a day, and still I hear no response, though you've had plenty of "gratuitous shots" at evolution.

Principia · 02-25-2003, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Keith: My point, exactly!

And what is your point? Here let's compare notes. I'll tell you my point: Everything has a purpose in hindsight. But no one can seem to agree on a coherent picture of a purpose that predicts future events. This is why teleology is a useless concept in science.

Now tell me what your point is.

Principia · 02-25-2003, 09:18 PM

Let me put it this way, Keith. Tell us what purpose guides the "future perfectly anticipated" evolution of bats. And we'll test it.

02-25-2003, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by James Hamlin

A group of organisms, say dodos, have genetic material which describe proteins which ultimately describe their traits. Enviromental pressures change, say it rains a lot more in that region, and dodos can't handle it and begin to die of pnemonia. But once in a while a dodo is born with genetic material allowing for a little umbrella on its head. Perhaps it was code that has been in the gene pool for centuries but didn't have any bearing on survival (neutral??), whatever, but the dodos with the umbrellas are the only ones that survive long enough to have sex and reproduce, passing on the umbrella gene. The umbrella gene becomes more and more common, growing a population which shares the umbrella gene. The dodos without the umbrella gene do not reproduce and their genomes are swept from the population. The altered population of dodos survive (for now).

.

Pretty smart dodo's to have an idea like that. You don't think a rainsuit would have been just as good?

Starboy · 02-25-2003, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Amos
Pretty smart dodo's to have an idea like that. You don't think a rainsuit would have been just as good?

Amos,

you are just tooo funny.

Some Loser · 02-25-2003, 11:26 PM

Quote:

Is it meaningful to describe or refer to processes, such as making longer ears, or editing, without also invoking purpose? Are you saying that in nature, processes "just happen" for no reason? How can the non-purposeful "editor" discern that which is, or will eventually be "useful" and which isn't?

Keith

That which is useful:
Those creatures which have certain traits will die before they are able to reproduce. Those with other traits will survive long enough to produce more of themselves. This is known as "Natural Selection". Furthermore we could call the traits of this latter group "useful" if we wanted to.

That which will eventually be useful:
Evolution does not make changes for what will eventually be useful - only what is useful now.

Quote:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Godless Dave

"Because organisms (unlike words on a page) reproduce. The organisms with useful mutations have a survival advantage and are likely to produce more offspring than organisms of the same species without that advantage."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again, you are using value-laden words like "useful" "survival", and "advantage" to describe a natural process that is supposed to be devoid of any purpose.

Keith

As I stated before, we can call the traits that cause a creature to survive "useful" if we want. Certain humans seeing value in such traits has nothing to do with these traits having an intrinisic purpose other than allowing the creature to survive.

HRG · 02-26-2003, 05:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Keith
No, I'm observing clear and obvious purpose and saying that it isn't due to a process that has no purpose. Even most six year-olds can tell you what an eye or ear is for. It is nonsense to say that eyes and ears "just happened" without a purpose.

Keith

No. You are not observing purposes, you are observing functions. Don't confuse what X does (function) with what X is for (purpose). Big difference, since the latter requires that some conscious Y made X with a particular purpose in mind.

Otherwise, you would have to conclude with good Dr. Pangloss that the purpose of our noses is to carry spectacles ...

Regards,
HRG.

Oolon Colluphid · 02-26-2003, 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Keith
I will readily admit that as hard as I try, I can't say anything meaningful about the process of evolution, or describe it, without doing what I see being done here--attributing purpose to the process.

Huh? Just how much 'purpose' is involved in something getting through a sieve? Because that is what natural selection is: a sieving process, that is repeated over and over.

You can see the 'purpose' of living things as being to get through these sieves if you like. But the fact remains that no purpose is involved, no end-point is required, in order for things to get through sieves. Some things just do, others just don't, depending on their suitability to their environment.

And you still haven't offered a definition.

DT

M1lk · 02-26-2003, 09:48 AM

You anger me...

Eyes: To allow the being to coordinate his tasks effectively.

Ears: To allow the being to be alerted of the actions around it.

Touch: To allow the being to perceive anything acting directly on it.

Smell: To give the being a way to associate objects with there purposes.

Taste: To enjoy ice cream.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-25-2003, 09:18 PM	#134
Principia Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: anywhere Posts: 1,976	Let me put it this way, Keith. Tell us what purpose guides the "future perfectly anticipated" evolution of bats. And we'll test it.

02-26-2003, 09:48 AM	#140
M1lk New Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: New Jersey Posts: 2	You anger me... Eyes: To allow the being to coordinate his tasks effectively. Ears: To allow the being to be alerted of the actions around it. Touch: To allow the being to perceive anything acting directly on it. Smell: To give the being a way to associate objects with there purposes. Taste: To enjoy ice cream.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.