09.10.07
3 comments
Three interesting comments from Rondinaro:
On ‘Can Computers Mimic Darwinian Evolution,
On ‘ID and esoteric subject?’,
History, Evolution, and the Darwin Debate
Posted in Comment at 2:45 pm by nemo
Three interesting comments from Rondinaro:
On ‘Can Computers Mimic Darwinian Evolution,
On ‘ID and esoteric subject?’,
Design by Beccary and Weblogs.us · XHTML · CSS
Stephen P. Smith said,
September 10, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Some feedback on two questions (On Computers that mimic Darwinian Evolution):
The burden is on evolutionists to demonstrate that sentience does not need to be introduced into their computer simulations. The assumption has been made that sentience is not a precondition to evolution. So it is more on the mark to ask: Why has it been assumed that “sentience” or out-and-out “consciousness” is not involved in evolution as a precondition??????
Show me the computer that feels itself playing chess? Show me the toaster that feels itself baking bread?
The silence on these questions is very telling! Instead of providing an answer we find the reverse question being asked. But it remains a fact that evolution (as an equation that can be imported into a computer) cannot explain its own precondition, whatever that precondition is revealed to be. Moreover, Schelling (as a philosopher evolutionist) has already put forward what he believes is the precondition for awareness of any kind. Furthermore, every law in ture is experiential: meaning that a law is first conceived in the mind, and later it is empirically verified. Therefore, every law of nature is already one of Kant’s synthetics. This being the case, it seems to be a wild leap of faith to assume that life emerged on sufficient ground from mere conditions of necessity given by laws that are only assumed to be equations. Sufficiency does not automatically come along for the ride whenever conditions of necessity are applied!