From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Sat Nov 13 2004 - 21:01:29 GMT
Scott,
I suggested "selection" was pejorative in our context, because its a
transient verb, commonly used metaphorically in evolution contexts, but
easily (and intentionally, mischievously) misconstrued anthropomorphically
as implying there is some being or consciousness doing the selecting.
Some things happen, some things don't.
Some of what happens is "influenced" by purposeful beings (termites build
mounds, humans build arguments) but life's complicated and specific outcomes
are rarely directly causally related to intentions without a large dose of
natural forces and statistics along the way.
If by spatio-temporal, you mean the world as a whole, then clearly
consciousness is a part of that.
I wouldn't limit the world to just those 4 dimensions, and I have no problem
with the idea of consciousness emerging from what pre-exists physically (in
the broadest sense). I'm equally open to the idea that consciousness-stuff
pre-existed made of the same stuff as the rest of the world. I'm not
strongly "materialist" as you acknowledge. In fact that's the search I'm
currently engaged in I guess.
Problem with a debate about consciousness as someting distinct from the
"physical" world is
(a) we'd need a long debate about what we meant by "consciousness" in that
case, and
(b) it's awfully dualist isn't it, and my leaning is to treat both as simply
manifestations of real world physics or SQ/DQ, consciousness just being a
name we give to some aspects of it. As I say I'm genuinely open to debate on
that.
Nowhere however, do I need (or tolerate) the idea that "a transcendent
conscious being" (an invisible hand) is necessary to explain outcomes,
without self-evident causes, except as a purely metaphorical short-hand for
something complicated and difficult to explain with watertight certainty.
The world is full of uncertainty; get used to it.
I will defend anyone's rights to hold deist (a transcendent conscious being)
religious beliefs, if it helps them get through their life, but I will
continue to pour dismissive scorn on anyone who brings such a fairy tale
into argument and decision making in the real world that affects me and my
loved ones. Sorry if that appears arrogant and offensive, but it is not my
intent.
Ian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Roberts" <jse885@earthlink.net>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 6:24 PM
Subject: Re: RE: MD Wisconsin School OKs Creationism Teaching
> Ian,
>
> > I'm more than happy to distinguish
> > "evolution"
> > from
> > evolution "solely" by chance and natural "selection"
> >
> > (Though I find the choices of the words "solely"and "selection"
> > pejorative, - just looking for an argument.)
>
> I put the "solely" in because that is the materialist claim. I am aware
> that you are not a materialist in the Dawkins or Monod mode. Why should
> "selection" be pejorative? One isn't likely to deny that some features
> survive and others don't, according to their functionality in a given
> environment.
>
> >
> > In fact when I say "evolution" all I mean is ...
> > Evolution by any "natural (real, believable, true) processes".
> > (physical, biological, sociological and intellectual, whatever
processes)
> > Something changes in one generation (for whatever reason), and is
> > Preserved or re-inforced in a subsequent generation (by whatever
> mechanism).
> >
> > It's credible, testable and falsifiable (in part) against lots of
> evidence,
> > and consistent with everyday experience, even thoughtful, analytical
> > everyday experience. I just do not need a fairy story to believe it.
> >
> > This is at least the tenth time round this loop in my short two years on
> > MoQ.
>
> It keeps coming around (as far as I am concerned) because we disagree on a
> prior philosophical point, not because I believe in a fairy story. That
> point is that an examination of consciousness led me to the conclusion
that
> the spatio-temporal is a product of consciousness, while you consider
> consciousness to be another spatio-temporal process. Is that a fair
> summation? If so, then from my point of view, "intellectual" should be
> distinguished from "natural", as that latter term is conventionally used
by
> SOMites, though in a post-SOM philosophy, they would be reunited at all
> levels (as they were in much pre-SOM philosophy), in a similar way that
> Quality is reunited at all levels in the MOQ. To me, the idea that
> consciousness became real at some point in time is the fairy story that
> most needs to be overcome. That is why we argue.
>
> - Scott
>
> >
> > Ian
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Scott Roberts" <jse885@earthlink.net>
> > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 4:45 AM
> > Subject: Re: RE: MD Wisconsin School OKs Creationism Teaching
> >
> >
> > > Ian,
> > >
> > > No one on this list, as far back as I can remember, has denied
> evolution.
> > >
> > > If you don't want to argue about it, I would refrain from remarks
about
> > > "people who want to believe some fairy story or other". Some, like
> myself,
> > > do not consider evolution solely through chance and natural selection
to
> > be
> > > a very promising theory, but I have no great desire to argue about it.
I
> > > will respond, though, when it is put forth as a given, and I will also
> > > respond when people, such as yourself, do not distinguish between
> > > "evolution" and "evolution solely through chance and natural
selection".
> > >
> > > - Scott
>
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward -
http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 13 2004 - 21:19:16 GMT