Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Some people believe the universe is alive and conscious. That it's made out of information, not "matter."
Others believe the universe is mechanical and non-living. The mechanical view probably started centuries ago when elaborate clockworks were made with people and animals that moved as if they were alive. Some philosophers concluded from this that living things are actually just mechanisms.
In ancient and prehistoric societies, all of nature was seen as alive and conscious. That was called animism.
The mechanistic view of nature led to the idea that life began and evolved because of a long series of accidents.
The idea that species evolved was around long before Darwin. Darwin's contribution was that he collected evidence for it, and he developed a theory about what might have caused species to evolve. His theory was that members of a species are born slightly different from each other, and the ones that are best equipped to survive in the environment will reproduce more. He observed that phenomenon and hypothesized that it might have been a contributing force in the evolution of all species.
After DNA was discovered in the 20th century, some biologists decided that Darwin was right. But they went beyond Darwin and decided that his theory can completely explain evolution. Genetic variations, caused by errors or accidents, are weeded out by natural selection, and this causes species to change gradually.
So that is the mechanistic view of life, which is supported by the mechanistic theory of evolution. And it is generally accepted in biology today.
So it turned out the mechanistic view of nature was correct, right? No. The mechanistic view became popular among biologists, and it made atheists feel justified in denying any universal consciousness.
But there is no scientific evidence that the mechanistic theory of evolution is true. Tons of evidence exists that species evolved. We know they were not simply created all at once. And simple observation, even just common sense, tells us that natural selection really does happen.
But we have no reason to think that accidental changes acted on by natural selection are the reason that species have evolved.
We have no reason to think that all genetic changes are accidental. We have no reason to think evolution is a mechanistic and mindless process.
No one can prove it either way. But there is increasing evidence in biology that cells can purposely modify their DNA. There are increasing reasons to think that evolution is much more complicated than what the currently popular theory says.
And some philosophers and scientists are starting to think the universe might not be a mechanistic, mindless clockwork after all.
Some people believe the universe is alive and conscious. That it's made out of information, not "matter."
Others believe the universe is mechanical and non-living. The mechanical view probably started centuries ago when elaborate clockworks were made with people and animals that moved as if they were alive. Some philosophers concluded from this that living things are actually just mechanisms.
In ancient and prehistoric societies, all of nature was seen as alive and conscious. That was called animism.
The mechanistic view of nature led to the idea that life began and evolved because of a long series of accidents.
The idea that species evolved was around long before Darwin. Darwin's contribution was that he collected evidence for it, and he developed a theory about what might have caused species to evolve. His theory was that members of a species are born slightly different from each other, and the ones that are best equipped to survive in the environment will reproduce more. He observed that phenomenon and hypothesized that it might have been a contributing force in the evolution of all species.
After DNA was discovered in the 20th century, some biologists decided that Darwin was right. But they went beyond Darwin and decided that his theory can completely explain evolution. Genetic variations, caused by errors or accidents, are weeded out by natural selection, and this causes species to change gradually.
So that is the mechanistic view of life, which is supported by the mechanistic theory of evolution. And it is generally accepted in biology today.
So it turned out the mechanistic view of nature was correct, right? No. The mechanistic view became popular among biologists, and it made atheists feel justified in denying any universal consciousness.
But there is no scientific evidence that the mechanistic theory of evolution is true. Tons of evidence exists that species evolved. We know they were not simply created all at once. And simple observation, even just common sense, tells us that natural selection really does happen.
But we have no reason to think that accidental changes acted on by natural selection are the reason that species have evolved.
We have no reason to think that all genetic changes are accidental. We have no reason to think evolution is a mechanistic and mindless process.
No one can prove it either way. But there is increasing evidence in biology that cells can purposely modify their DNA. There are increasing reasons to think that evolution is much more complicated than what the currently popular theory says.
And some philosophers and scientists are starting to think the universe might not be a mechanistic, mindless clockwork after all.
Mechanics cannot - I repeat, cannot, function without a precisely controlled force.
If we look at the mechanist aspect of the universe then our basic knowledge and common sense should tell us that there HAS to be a controlled and precise force behind all this to run.
A general religious take on evolution is that, yes indeed, there are evolution processes that happen in nature but they don’t happen as a result of an infinite number of accidents.
Evolution is a controlled process by this force that is running this entire madness.
And man is sent down to earth by God. (That’s faith). He did not evolve from monkeys, chimps and common ancestor. Darwin only oresent a theory that non religious people tend to believe and religious people don’t - and I don’t have an issue with either.
Human being is perhaps one of the only exception to this mechanic aspect of the universe. Because humans seem to be a blend of mechanics with greater intelligence
.
Many of our body organs function as a machine with no choice - they simply do their job - and our brains provide a greeter aspect of intelligence, and hence we the natural ability to make choices.
Rest of the universe seems to be functioning on mechanical basis with little to no intelligence - and no choice - just like a machine.
We already had two evolution threads by this poster closed down. So I'll just say that Go4No is ignoring the facts and preferring finger pointing. And fallacious too - the clockwork models of the universe originated the Watchmaker argument for God. Finding that natural processes often explained this stuff and didn't need a god, so the god -claim was pushed back into a few as yet unsolved 'gap for God' mysteries.
The other poster is still ignoring the facts.
"We didn't come from no monkeys", says Cardinal error. I'm not going to correct on the detail of "Common ancestor, not monkeys" because I get the general idea. And the answer is - the evidence says we did. Deal with it.
Some people believe the universe is alive and conscious. That it's made out of information, not "matter."
Others believe the universe is mechanical and non-living. The mechanical view probably started centuries ago when elaborate clockworks were made with people and animals that moved as if they were alive. Some philosophers concluded from this that living things are actually just mechanisms.
In ancient and prehistoric societies, all of nature was seen as alive and conscious. That was called animism.
The mechanistic view of nature led to the idea that life began and evolved because of a long series of accidents.
The idea that species evolved was around long before Darwin. Darwin's contribution was that he collected evidence for it, and he developed a theory about what might have caused species to evolve. His theory was that members of a species are born slightly different from each other, and the ones that are best equipped to survive in the environment will reproduce more. He observed that phenomenon and hypothesized that it might have been a contributing force in the evolution of all species.
After DNA was discovered in the 20th century, some biologists decided that Darwin was right. But they went beyond Darwin and decided that his theory can completely explain evolution. Genetic variations, caused by errors or accidents, are weeded out by natural selection, and this causes species to change gradually.
So that is the mechanistic view of life, which is supported by the mechanistic theory of evolution. And it is generally accepted in biology today.
So it turned out the mechanistic view of nature was correct, right? No. The mechanistic view became popular among biologists, and it made atheists feel justified in denying any universal consciousness.
But there is no scientific evidence that the mechanistic theory of evolution is true. Tons of evidence exists that species evolved. We know they were not simply created all at once. And simple observation, even just common sense, tells us that natural selection really does happen.
But we have no reason to think that accidental changes acted on by natural selection are the reason that species have evolved.
We have no reason to think that all genetic changes are accidental. We have no reason to think evolution is a mechanistic and mindless process.
No one can prove it either way. But there is increasing evidence in biology that cells can purposely modify their DNA. There are increasing reasons to think that evolution is much more complicated than what the currently popular theory says.
And some philosophers and scientists are starting to think the universe might not be a mechanistic, mindless clockwork after all.
You are ignorant of what is meant by information.
You are still ignorant of the evidence you claim we do not have.
It is you who has no evidence the universe is alive and conscious. That is why you can not explain how this would be.
You think I'm ignorant, but I think you are ignorant.
Yea but its not just Harry Diog that thinks that. Loads of people on these forums do. You got hounded out of the health & wellness pages because of the tripe that you expound. And pretty much closed down on philosophy. So now you've ended up here. But it seems the regulars here are on to you also.
Your confused thesis appears to be that the DNA mutations which permit natural selection to occur (even though most of those changes are either deleterious or neutral and so don't effect evolution, but I guess you are only interested in the positive effect mutations) don't occur by random but are driven by something. So really a mutable information system that elicits information flow when it is good must be driven by an intelligence. I guess when its bad or neutral mutation you don't feel such a simplistic urge to have a driver. And by simple probabilities one would expect a 2 out of 3 mutations to not be advantageous.
But cause really you love a teleological explanation, and you really need a big father figure looking after everything you gotta ascribe it to that. So God (or your stand in) drives evolution. Amazing. So basically the position of the catholic church and at least half the non-US based Christian denominations anyway.
I guess we'll see you in the Self Sufficiency forums next, they are less successful at spotting Dunning-Kruger issues and fraudulence there. Why not tell them about how you believe mediums are real or that epigenetics can lead to speciation that you previously argued in different threads. You've got too much luggage - 'bout time you changed your user name.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
