Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8936 total)
31 online now:
GDR, Percy (Admin), ringo, Taq (4 members, 27 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 861,637 Year: 16,673/19,786 Month: 798/2,598 Week: 44/251 Day: 21/23 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How is Natural selection a mechanism?
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 58 of 191 (815366)
07-19-2017 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by AndrewPD
07-19-2017 1:34 PM


I am still puzzled here. I don't see how evolution explains the existence of the thing being selected.

Natural selection operates on the individual phenotypes. Mutations occur in the individual genotypes. Evolution occurs on the population.

There's all kinds of causes of mutations. Whether or not they stick in the population or not depends on how the changes to individuals' fitness to the environment are affected by the changes in their phenotype.

I guess I'm not sure what "thing" evolution doesn't explain? It doesn't explain how the first organisms got here - but that's not a part of the theory; it explains how life has gotten so diverse.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by AndrewPD, posted 07-19-2017 1:34 PM AndrewPD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by AndrewPD, posted 07-19-2017 3:57 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(3)
Message 65 of 191 (815435)
07-20-2017 8:43 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by AndrewPD
07-19-2017 3:57 PM


o how can selection explain somethings existence?

New things don't emerge because of natural selection, they emerge because of mutation.

Natural selection is what fixates the new things into the population.

And you have to think about these things in terms of populations and not individuals.

And if you're gonna use inanimate objects as examples, there needs to be something analogous to reproduction. Cars don't mate.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by AndrewPD, posted 07-19-2017 3:57 PM AndrewPD has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 191 (815465)
07-20-2017 11:45 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by Taq
07-20-2017 11:30 AM


Consciousness is no different than the emergent properties of digestion or circulation.

Oh, I dunno... My digestion and circulation are not aware of themselves like my consciousness is


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Taq, posted 07-20-2017 11:30 AM Taq has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 191 (815564)
07-21-2017 9:43 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by AndrewPD
07-21-2017 8:39 AM


Consciousness is a deep topic.

Your point is not lost, but if you're talking about the "deep topic", then I think the term sentience is better.

I mean, a goldfish is conscious...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by AndrewPD, posted 07-21-2017 8:39 AM AndrewPD has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 99 of 191 (815868)
07-25-2017 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by AndrewPD
07-25-2017 4:41 PM


Re: How would you design an experiment/test?
The brain is quite homogenous...

No it isn't:


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by AndrewPD, posted 07-25-2017 4:41 PM AndrewPD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by AndrewPD, posted 07-25-2017 6:44 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 191 (815877)
07-25-2017 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by AndrewPD
07-25-2017 6:53 PM


Re: How would you design an experiment/test?
I was referring to its neurons.

Those aren't homogeneous either... there are several types of neurons.

But your picture enhances my point that losing 90% of the brain and functioning normal is problematic for localisation and correlation claims.

Uh... "losing 90% of the brain and functioning normal" - that's a bit sensational. And I'm being nice about it. I checked your link, it really doesn't prove anything to me. That one pic looks shady, but it doesn't really matter - it's beside the point.

It was Taq who was claiming it was similar to losing intestine. I was granting him that the brain may have some flexibility due to reusing neurons elsewhere after brain damage.

Well, as far as we can tell on Earth, sentience requires a brain. And as I said in Message 68, my digestion isn't aware of itself like my sentience ("consciousness" - see Message 70) is. So they're already different to me.

Taq writes:

Get back to me when you find a human without a brain who still functions normally.


This is naive.

It really isn't. If you have something that "functions normally" without a brain, then it isn't human.

Your claim that a person can function normally after "losing" 90% of their brain is unfounded - your link even uses the word "damaged", but still, it's beside the point.

I mentioned earlier vegetative states and other states where the presence of consciousness is unknown. You seem to be trying to describe consciousness as it appears to an observer observing someone else's behaviour but as I have said it is private and subjectivity.

You will never have the same access to my pain as I do.

Ditto.

Look, you and I are both sentient, and we exist on Earth. That's undeniable.

Whether or not I -appear- conscious to you is irrelevant. Dualism could be true easily and consciousness leave the body and enter another body or realm.

Sure, but forget what "could be". What IS?

What is relevant is whether or not you appear sentient to me. And you do (unlike a goldfish, although they do appear conscious, i.e. "awake").

What feature of consciousness are you picturing that can only exist in one brain at one time?

The ones that make us human are the ones that allow us to interact with each other out in the real world on Earth.

All the spiritual beings that I have encountered that appear sentient to me are not out there running around in the real world on Earth where everyone other human can see them too.

Apparently you need a brain to do that. That's not naive - the alternative is.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by AndrewPD, posted 07-25-2017 6:53 PM AndrewPD has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 117 of 191 (815995)
07-27-2017 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by AndrewPD
07-26-2017 7:23 PM


You never have access to anyone's consciousness other than your own.

Uh, sure I do:

"Hey man, how are you feeling?"


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by AndrewPD, posted 07-26-2017 7:23 PM AndrewPD has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 132 of 191 (816185)
07-31-2017 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by AndrewPD
07-29-2017 12:17 PM


Why do things attempt to survive? Why do genes have a survival motive?

The animals that don't have a strong drive to survive and reproduce tend to not end up passing on their genes that cause that behavior because they die before they mate.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by AndrewPD, posted 07-29-2017 12:17 PM AndrewPD has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 137 of 191 (816292)
08-02-2017 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by AndrewPD
08-02-2017 12:00 PM


You don't have direct access to my favorite color, but it's red. Now you know that. Why does it matter that your access to my favorite color was indirect?

How are you feeling today?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by AndrewPD, posted 08-02-2017 12:00 PM AndrewPD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by AndrewPD, posted 08-02-2017 12:21 PM New Cat's Eye has responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 142 of 191 (816305)
08-02-2017 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 139 by AndrewPD
08-02-2017 12:21 PM


That didn't answer the question...

Why does it matter that your access to my favorite color was indirect?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by AndrewPD, posted 08-02-2017 12:21 PM AndrewPD has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 184 of 191 (816653)
08-08-2017 11:07 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by AndrewPD
08-05-2017 1:51 PM


Here is a simple analogy of entropy.
You drop an uncooked egg and it shatters.

I don't think there has ever been an instance where that egg has in the next moment or later returned to being an unbroken egg.

What about a salt solution precipitating a crystalline structure?

If that's not, according to your meaning, a "decrease" then dissolving the same crystalline salt structure must be...

So which way is it, according to your understanding?

Honestly, you haven't completely grasped the concept of entropy yet.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by AndrewPD, posted 08-05-2017 1:51 PM AndrewPD has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019