--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "off_world_beings" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "off_world_beings" > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "off_world_beings" > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > What would happen if Hagelin seriously weighed in on the > > > > > > current, highly charged, debate on intelligent design? How > > > > > > would he argue, left, right, or center? > > > > > > > > > > Define the terms first. > > > > > > > > > > Evolution is the inspiration for a major form of artificial > > > > > intelligence theory, afterall...>> > > > > > > > > I didn't mention evolution because evolution means a process > > > > which has a goal. ie. Intelligent. The goal being the survival > > > > of the fittest according to Darwinists. > > > > > > I'm not sure Darwinists would agree that survival > > > of the fittest could be characterized as a goal. > > > That the fittest survive is just what happens-- > > > how could it not?>>> > > > > Then it cannot be given the name 'evolution' as if it has some > > purpose. It would need to be called 'chaos'. > > The word 'evolution' does NOT imply 'purpose.' > > The sentient beings of the universe, as far as I can > tell, are all evolving. But personally I don't think > that there is anywhere in particular that they are > evolving *to*. I have no problem with everything > always evolving, but in a chaotic (meaning Inter- > dependent Origination) way. No goal, no purpose, > just beings interacting and moving in the karmic > direction spawned by that interation.>>>
Then the word 'sentient' is out of place and is an illusion that you have placed upon the dead, inert, dumb universe. You are avoiding the issue which is that evolution has order. You said it yourself, it has 'direction' This implies order. Order implies intelligence. All the words you are using imply intelligence. If you say it has no order then you must say it is chaotic. There is no way that you can claim it is chaotic in an intelligent way, which is what you just claimed. Or maybe you mean't is is intelligent in a chaotic way. This doesn't fly either. If it is chaotic it has no business being called the (now) lofty name of the 'God' called 'Evolution'. OffWorld ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
