--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], "off_world_beings" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], "off_world_beings" > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > --- In [email protected], "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. > > "Evolution" doesn't necessarily imply purpose, > just change over time. > > > It would need to be called 'chaos'. All Darwinists believe > > that evolution is a process based on a need. ie. Intelligence. > > No, really. In fact, the objection some religious > people have to Darwinian theory is that it removes > the *need* for a purpose--doesn't exclude it, but > makes it unnecessary. The whole shebang could have > arisen on its own, without any guiding intelligence. > > Whether there *was* a guiding intelligence is a > religious or philosophical question, not a scientific > one. Science can't say one way or the other.>>>
Then you are unaware that scientists are most definatlely saying one way. They are most definatley saying that there is no designer. YOu are now talking about first causes, which I did not bring up, you did. I said there is a wholeness that is more than the sum of it's parts and which others here refer to a 'system'. This implies order, and direction. A system MEANS intelligence. Evolution is a system that exhibits intelligence, wether it comes out if unintelligence or not is not the issue. I thought you were arguing that evolution does not exhibit intelligence (ie. a system with order, direction) 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/
