Intelligence Design vs Problem Solving
Related Topics
Antisocial PersonalityAttention Deficit Disorder AdhdBehavioral Problems | Cocaine AbuseCocaine AddictionDrug Dealing |
Dick d...@christophers.net
I think we can generally life forms exhibits problem solving. Whether man solving a technical problem, or a bird wanting to get food out of the bark of a tree.
The question about "Intelligent Design" seems to have a stumbling block when one tries to separate life problem solving ability versus intervention by outside intelligence. (Whether "Intelligence" is part of our universe or outside is a separate question).
How would one distinguish inherent problem solving from external intervention?
Part of this question came about when I mention "inspiration" to describe the common experience of suddenly having an answer full blown appear, or musical composition appear to young Mozart.
Clearly inspiration suggests intervention since working on a problem is a conscious effort where as the "inspiration" seems to come from nowhere. Authors, musicians, scientists, novelists or just day to day citizens faced with solving a problem.
If there was "intelligence" in the creation of the universe presumably it would still be involved. Thus the possibility of creative inspiration coming from the "intelligence." Does anyone see a way, by definition or qualities of distinguishing between problem solving and intervention of intelligence?
I think we could agree that "problem solving" can be supported by evolutionist theories and "inspiration" leans more toward intelligent intervention.
If intelligence in the universe works through individuals (why not?), then we each are potential tools or are proud recipients of intelligence.
BTW does "problem solving" relate to "design?" Is the design of a solution to a problem qualify as design?
"Alan Wright" a...@yahoo.com
"Seems" is the key word in the above. Read up on some current books or papers on brain science and theory of consciousness. Things will seem less mysterious. A great deal of ordinary brain function occurs at other than the conscious level.
Aside from your argument being debased by the above, you have not given or cited rigorous definitions of the terms involved, so the rest could be debated in any number of ways.
Alan
A Pagano anthony.pag...@verizon.net
Pagano replies: This seems rather odd since "problem solving" deductively implies an intelligent agent.
Pagano replies: Since both require an intelligent agent and neither rule out an intelligent agent how is this relevent?
Pagano replies: Man's ability to invent theories and works of art which are not mere deductions is inexplicable in terms of man's purely naturalistic theories. Materialists have virtually ignored this. Sometimes they argue that (the myth of) induction which is logically invalid is responsible.
Pagano replies: I agree that that this ability of man to create new knowledge from "nowhere" implies intelligent intervention but it may not be direct intervention. It may be a gift designed into humans by an intelligent agent.
Pagano replies: How is any of this a problem for Intelligent Design?
Pagano replies: If the phrase "problem solving" and the label "intervention" both deductively imply an intelligent agent then they cannot be distinquished on that basis-----that is, that an intelligent agent is required. Perhaps you mean to ask, if there is a means of identifying the intelligent agent.
Pagano replies: The phrase "problem solving" is anthropomorphic. Purely materialistic processes of neoDarwinian evolution do not "act" or "solve" or "intervene." Individual events are deterministic according to laws of nature and the "paths" of evolution are random and probabistic. While we have seen intelligent agents solve problems purely naturalistic evolution has never been directly observed at all.
Regards, T Pagano
David Jensen da...@dajensen-family.com
On Sat, 16 Nov 2002 18:58:50 +0000 (UTC), in talk.origins Dick <d...@christophers.net> wrote in <r33dtu8egnirp07t2bkad3644cqe8p9...@4ax.com>: I don't think that kludge is a particularly elegant or useful form of intelligent design. The 'designer' of life took whatever happened to be available and whipped something up. If there is an intelligent designer he should be embarr***ed by his shoddy workmanship.
"Leonardo Dasso" Lda...@btinternet.com
Yes. You provide a good example in your post. Your argument that inspiration involves intervention is an example of (very bad) problem solving in which no intelligence has intervened.
regards leo
"Daniel Rutten" n...@junk.com
Just because 'problem solving' is easier to define than 'inspiration', we now need a intelligent intervention?
- daniel
w ...@ptnospam.com
On Sat, 16 Nov 2002 19:39:34 +0000 (UTC), A Pagano i guess pagano's never heard of 'sociobiology' which attempts to do much of what pagano says isn't being done. obviously he's not up on science. who wudda guessed.
it could, equally, be the inspiration of wizards who live in our basement. until you can tell us HOW this works, it's magic.
my dog is intelligent. can it design a universe? i dont think so.
intelligent w/o natural law...the forces of nature...accomplishes nothing. but creationists say that natural law isnt involved. thus they rule out intelligent design.
bigdak ...@aol.comGetaGrip (Bigdakine)
Sort of like bifurcations in mathematical systems?
I think not.
Stuart Dr. Stuart A. Weinstein Ewa Beach Institute of Tectonics "To err is human, but to really foul things up requires a creationist"
Dick d...@christophers.net
On Sat, 16 Nov 2002 19:11:43 +0000 (UTC), "Alan Wright" Studies of blood flow in the brain hardly approach an understanding of creativity, language, sight, or consciousness. Blood flows slowly compared to the millisecond actions following thought. I am surprised you include "at the conscious level" in your criticism, no one understands what consciousness is or can even agree on a definition. I fully respect the progress made in understanding the brain's functions. Many people are trying, but we are generations away from having useful knowledge, let alone knowledge than can rule out "intelligent intervention." You are easily pleased if you find current research explains much.
Dick d...@christophers.net
On Sat, 16 Nov 2002 19:39:34 +0000 (UTC), A Pagano I specified "outside intelligence" as a possible interventionist element in problem solving. Lot's of questions have no specified relevancy until answered. I am sure Darwin had lots of question that had no relevancy until he was inspired to see physical separation as a change agent leaving modified species unique to each island. Then the "why and how" questions had meaning.
It could be a useful took if someone could form a way to define "problem solving and design" in such a way that the source could be specified. If a person starts to speak in a language with no prior exposure, one could suggest intervention. Edgar Cayce seemed to have acquired medical knowledge with no prior exposure to the academic world. I would also suggest Mozart at age 7 may represent intervention when he was then able to compose music. Grand ma Moses had no artistic ability and then showed a talent in her 80's.
I would not argue for any of the above examples, only to indicate the kind of thing one might think about in trying to separate intervention from inherent intelligent activity.
I don't know that it is a problem for ID. However one question I have read has to do with how ID would function. Did ID set the physical forces knowing what would evolve and then move on to other projects, or is that intelligence still active today?
A monkey need not use a stick to get bananas, he could continue to search on the ground, or climb the tree. Using a tool seems arbitrary and suggests "problem solving" in that the monkey saw the other alternative choices as less acceptable, or was "inspired" with the observation that the stick could be used to move the bananas and that might cause the bananas to fall.
If only a human can make such connections, then anthropomorphic would be reasonable, but animals are known to use tools.
Dick d...@christophers.net
On Sat, 16 Nov 2002 19:45:24 +0000 (UTC), David Jensen David, let go of the YEC god. Consider a laboratory setting where things are being experimented. Although I don't think of the intelligence as an individual like a "god" (I think of a culture or team), if I did I would refer to it as a "young god." I have even imagined a young god given an "energy set" for a birthday give, maybe the 1000th birthday, and setting up an experimental room. The energy set has some set of rules, but get ignored and the energy escapes its holders and the young god starts to apply rules to organize and contain the energy thus forming quarks and later atoms and molecules, etc.
Such a view would not expect any perfection, but does suggest the process would try things out. Keeping parts and adding changes. DNA is a beautiful tool to make changes. If, in haste, part of the code not needed the "growth" switch is turned of instead of removing code that might be shared (Microsoft shared software) thus vestigial parts.
IC thus becomes a useable concept as once designed, it could be used as a "sub routine" to build upon. Different life form using similar soft organs are easily used as platforms for diverse life forms with similar environments.
Where I get into trouble is with the moral aspect. My experimental intelligence has shown no human recognized morality, that is sanctity for life. Such intelligence would see man as guinea pigs perhaps, perhaps worth protecting until needed, but expendable. I further wonder if we are lab animals if we are being used to solve social problems present in the intelligence's culture. This can be hopeful, for as we solve the social problems thrown into our arena successfully, then we benefit ourselves (safe for another night) as well as helping our owners.
Another interesting possibility would be that we are agents, hand puppets of entities of the intelligence. What we call souls might have real existence in another realm thus what we experience is conserved.
I am free to wonder. What I can't do is accept what seems to simple an answer. Evolutionists want to control the rules and arenas whereas the world is a gestalt, a whole organism composed of parts that are deeply woven together.
Dick d...@christophers.net
On Sat, 16 Nov 2002 21:33:26 +0000 (UTC), "Daniel Rutten" Not "need", but suspect.
Dick d...@christophers.net
You reject "suggests", then what does it suggest to you?
Your signature bar does suggest you have a firm opinion.
David Jensen da...@dajensen-family.com
On Sun, 17 Nov 2002 18:54:21 +0000 (UTC), in talk.origins Dick <d...@christophers.net> wrote in <droftu43qcsltg47kkivld1nr0k9gsv...@4ax.com>: I don't see much point in indulging in such unsupportable metaphysics.
My attitude is far more pragmatic.
"D C" o...@ooppop.com
Simple minded piece of shit put the world to rights.
Do people let their children near you?
w ...@ptnospam.com
plagiarist. i asked you first.
and it's obvious you havent a clue about how science works, or what a theory is.
i hope you make better movies than you do fiction about science.
clown.
Sverker Johansson l...@hlk.no.hj.spam.se
Yes. Look at _which_ problems organisms solve. What are organisms optimized for?
In the case of inherent problem solving, on an evolutionary basis, we can predict that organisms will evolve solutions to _their_own_ problems, problems that affect their own livelihood. Problem-solving organisms will be optimized for _their_own_ (inclusive) fitness.
In the case of external intelligent intervention, organisms can be expected to solve the external agent's problems, rather than their own problems. Look at domestic animals -- cows are optimized for producing milk and/or beef for us, rather than optmized for their own concerns.
--
Best regards, HLK, Physics Sverker Johansson U of Jonkoping
----------------------------------------------
WAR IS PEACE FREEDOM IS SLAVERY IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH - adapted from CREATIONISM IS SCIENCE George Orwell
bigdak ...@aol.comGetaGrip (Bigdakine)
It doesn't suggest anything to me.
Unless you think God suggested something to my cat to enable her to open up doors. For 6 years I was safe.
Then one day..
Stuart Dr. Stuart A. Weinstein Ewa Beach Institute of Tectonics "To err is human, but to really foul things up requires a creationist"
"Alan Wright" a...@yahoo.com
"Studies of blood flow"??? You really are out of touch.
Nonsense. A great deal is known about consciousness.
Read a little before you make yourself look foolish.
LoL!
And you easily disregard a vast body of work you know nothing at all about.
Alan
"Noelie S. Alito" noe...@deadspam.com
But people can measure the consistent results of conscious directed mental activity. Other brain activity (e.g., in the areas dedicated to translating visual or aural input) covers processing of which no one has reported consciousness--nor would be expected to, as the neural signals are meaningless in their sensory form.
I find "intelligent intervention" has been quite useful in mitigating mania, schizophrenia, and clinical depression. The more knowlege we have, the more ii we can apply. (Unfortunately, no one knows how to correct for a missing or damaged "large olive" responsible for the grossest forms of autism...yet.) Where do you get *your* info on the "current research"? You seem to be a decade or so out of date.
Some historic cases of impressive creativity look very much like what is nowadays observed in manic episodes. Another form of inspiration--at least in my case--comes from a synthesis of background education and experience (i.e., deep familiarity with the subject) driven by mood.
Well, when the bird bends the wire to form a tool which can extract otherwise-inaccessible food, that design would fall under "problem solving". As they say, "Necessity is the mother of invention." (OTOH, the designs made by artsy architects often fall under "problem creation". ;-) Noelie
--
Michael: I don't know anyone who could get through the day without two or three juicy rationalizations. They're more important than sex.
Sam: Ah, come on. Nothing's more important than sex.
Michael: Oh yeah? Ever gone a week without a rationalization?
| To Top |