Problems with random evolution, and How would we detect teleology?
DMR at Amazon
The question of evolution has turned into a droning trance on the part of public intellectuals, scientists, and biologists. The reality is that noone really understands what evolution is.
One reason is that unless we can track ‘evolution’ at close range we are likely to miss its highspeed action.
Detecting teleology in world history can give us a hint.
From the Introduction:
Problems with random evolution, and
How would we detect teleology?
The perspective of Darwinism is that of random evolution, and this
framework has always concealed a host of problems, however attractive
the concept is for proponents of reductionist science. Random evolution
1. must skirt severe improbability, as the scientist Fred Hoyle
2. overcome without a template, system memory, or feedback
control the inherent tendency to peter out, deviate, or retrogress,
3. operate in partial steps to construct complex objects at
random, with no direct connections between steps, in constructs
with tens of thousands of parts,
4. effect infinitesimal, geographically isolated innovations into
species level change over large regions or whole species.
This is but a short list. It should remind us that Darwinism is
implausible from the start, and yet seems to be scientific because the
fantasy of natural selection is never tested against reality and thus avoids
the really difficult implications in our list of problems. At the same time,
our four problems point to something that must be complex beyond our
understanding. It is not surprising biologists cling to an oversimplification
like natural selection that makes these difficulties vanish.
Detecting Teleology It is not hard to deduce what evolution
should look like from these difficulties, which must leave their
signature in the data of any given chronicle. The problem is
that these issues imply something controversial: teleological
sequences. What form would teleology take, and how would
we recognize it?
There are very few solutions to this set of contradictions: one is that
of an explicit evolutionary driver, a sort of macro process that operates
intermittently over the long range, and acts on wholes via transitional
areas of reasonable size. That’s a tall order. But sure enough world history
will give us an example