Joined: Jan. 2007
|Quote (guthrie @ Jan. 09 2007,16:01)|
|Hey, Dave banned someone else:|
|66. DaveScot // Jan 9th 2007 at 3:17 am |
febble is no longer with us - anyone who doesn’t understand how natural selection works to conserve (or not) genomic information yet insists on writing long winded anti-ID comments filled with errors due to lack of understanding of the basics is just not a constructive member - good luck on your next blog febble
Comment by DaveScot — January 9, 2007 @ 3:17 am
Yet they were a theist! However, apart from daring to disagree with DS, it seems to me that they take rather a telic (is that the right viewpoint) view of it all, which is of course silly:
|Natural selection +replication with modification doesn’t do that, of course. It cannot rehearse possible future courses of action, and choose the best. It’s gotta do what it’s gotta do. However, it does do a form of planning that we also do, and so do less intelligent animals, which is that it learns. While it may not plan novel strategies de novo or from observation, it learns from direct experience, as we do. If it makes a mistake, it doesn’t repeat the mistake. It makes sure that in the future it does what worked last time. So in that limited sense, yes, it “plans”. It “chooses” what worked, rather than what didn’t. And like us, sometimes it gets lucky by accident, and remembers that trick too.|
Well, read it in context with the other posts, and tell me if you still think it's silly. I don't think it is. Nor is it "telic" exactly.
And if it was you who invited me over from the Guardian, thanks!