So, if anything, you've just demonstrated that if evolution works to a plan, then it works to a rather stupid plan. That presents quite a major problem to nearly all of the world-views that have such a plan in them.
Does morality work without a deity?
- Thread starter thecrazyscot
- Start date
So, if anything, you've just demonstrated that if evolution works to a plan, then it works to a rather stupid plan. That presents quite a major problem to nearly all of the world-views that have such a plan in them.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Thats relative. If you look closely weakness and strenght goes together. To create new you need to destroy the old. Any world view which doesnt reflect the fluid and flexible and constantly developing universal nature is bound to get obsolete.
Perfection
The Great Head.
When you say it is part of some wider inteligence,.what do you mean?
How have you arrived at the conclusion that there must be some wider inteligence?
I dont say its wrong but I dont think that definition is complete either.
Perfection
The Great Head.
Who says not feeling pain is superior? And superior in what way?
In evolutionary terms the painfulnes of pain is readily explained by the fact that things that cause pain are likely to adversely effect our ability to spread our genes. If pain wasn't so painful we wouldn't avoid situations where it occurs.
The most striking is the functioning of human unit. Most of our bodily functions arent directly linked or depending on our conscious inteligence but our inteligence needs these to be performed in order to function properly. In this regard our subconscience is more efficient and intelligent then our conscious intelligence.
Why wouldnt evolution produce species which can spred their genes just about everywhere via imunity to any kind of pain whatsoever? The capacity for pain seem to have some other function in the process...
Yes. People born with a reduced (or no) capacity to feel pain tend to die young, because they don't notice and treat minor injuries, which quickly become infected and thus major, life-threatening injuries. Hence, animals feel different levels of pain (and different parts of the same animal feel different levels of pain), such that it provides whatever happy mean causes them to have the most grandchildren.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Either way, if you take the time to read the several introductory paragraphs in that link, I think it would make a lot more sense why it doesn't make sense to say any organism is the pinnacle of evolution.
Evolution doesn't plan. Whatever happens, happens.
Thats the part of the plan. Every possibility is exhausted in the process.
Well I have never said this wider inteligence is very smart, right. Instead of increasing the capacity for pain it could increase regeneration ability. But that doesnt seem to be the plan...
Perfection
The Great Head.
Of course. Our conscious intelligence is a hack on our animal intelligence. Our concious intelligence has been around maybe 5 million years whereas our animal intelligence has been around 500 million years. But I don't see what that has to do with this "wider inteligence" you speak of.
what other function di you propose?
There are plenty of species that don't experience pain. My lawn doesn't seem to mind being mowed.
But for animals with sophisticated brains pain is very important. The world we live in is very dangerous. In the moment pain tells us to get away from dangerous situations. After it has passed pain it makes us reflect on the cause so we can avoid future pains.
Perhaps it couldn't. In a very general way it seems to me that regeneration ability goes down with complexity, so it could be that to have the added complexity of a mammal compared to a salamander means you cannot have regeneration ability. Or perhaps that the energy cost of having said regeneration ability is not worth it for mammals.
The point is there is no plan.
You know the story about frog being born and living all its life in a well without ability to climb its walls? Its also sure that the well is all there is.
Perfection
The Great Head.
Regeneration is expensive, it requires a lot of time and energy to heal. Those are important things for organisms to live and they're very limited too. It's very difficult to regenerate complex organs, the body needs to recognize what's wrong then figure out how to fix it. That's a complicated task to figure out and coordinate biochemically, and if you get it wrong you'll end up with body parts where they shouldn't be. And there are plenty of situations where no feasible regeneration will possibly save you.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
It isn't, though - responding to the last sentence there. Creatures breed, mutations are introduced, and slowly over time a creature better able to adapt to the present environment emerges. Sometimes. Sometimes you get mutations that are not beneficial and the resulting creature suffers as a result and has less of a chance to contribute to the genepool. The majority of possibilities aren't tried in this process even. Like I said, whatever happens, happens.
Yes this world is very dangerous. In fact the more sentinent you are the more danger there is. What a paradox! The explanation could be simple though. Sentinence is the goal and the danger and pain serves as an excelator. Otherwise we could have stayed on the level of virus and inhabit all universe from there. What is it that drives life into taking such a risks? I believe its something which takes pleasure from that process and that is manifested through that process as well.
I am not sure. The estimated number of "current" species are over 14 mil. while the described ones amount to 3-4 mil. Can you honestly say majority options arent even tried?
I used to study nature and what I can say is that within the rules there are no rules. You get animals so bizare and unthinkable that it blows your mind...
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
There is no way that all possible scenarios are tried, because mutations are in many ways random. It's not even close. There are far too many limiting factors for anything approaching to that to be true.
