N.Wells
Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
First of all, you just asked whether I agreed with the idea that evolution is intelligent, and I'm showing how that question has already been asked and answered. Secondly, you are proposing to replace evolution via mutation, recombination, natural selection, and drift by an ill-defined and poorly thought-out process that you keep calling intelligent design, so yes, you are ascribing changes in lifeforms over generations to intelligence.
From Jim Wynne, also several years ago, | Quote | | I think the idea is defensible that extant species are lineages whose ancestors made successful / lucky guesses. That seems a reasonable metaphor, and it's not wrong to see all living organisms as descendants of a long line of lottery winners, so to speak. However, the "guesses" (which, yes, aren't really guesses) are essentially always made before the question is posed. Each individual has in effect proposed its answers before receiving the test. This is where the metaphors derail when they think of intelligent genome-level responses to life's challenges: all bets are placed before the wheel spins, and most individuals respond by going bankrupt / dying / failing to reproduce. Notwithstanding the intellectual attractiveness of the idea, intelligent, individual, evolution-level responses do not seem to be a possibility. |
|
