<as hominem = With, em, respect, I have to say that this thread
has not made a lot of sense.>
'This just confirms that there is no accounting for values or
> goals rationally.'
MP: In other words _Evolution does not have goals._
Evolution is a conceptual framework we use to make sense of the
world we see, and it's a bl*ody good one, by and large. But
evolution in the sense of the changes we can point to as
occurring in the forms of living things, well it all just
happens; just like the flowing of water down hill.
You will gain more traction by looking at what it is that
actually endures and changes over time: on the one hand genes of
DNA and on the other hand memes embodied in behaviour patterns,
the brain structures which mediate them, and the environmental
changes [glyphs, paintings, structures, etc,] which stimulate
and guide them.
Mark Peaty CDES
Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
> On 08/06/07, *Brent Meeker* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> The top level goal implied by evolution would be to have as many
> children as you can raise through puberty. Avoiding death should
> only be a subgoal.
> Yes, but evolution doesn't have an overseeing intelligence which figures
> these things out, and it does seem that as a matter of fact most people
> would prefer to avoid reproducing if it's definitely going to kill them,
> at least when they aren't intoxicated. So although reproduction trumps
> survival as a goal for evolution, for individual humans it's the other
> way around. This just confirms that there is no accounting for values or
> goals rationally. What we have is what we're stuck with.
> Stathis Papaioannou
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at