Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 76 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-23-2019 5:20 AM
21 online now:
Pressie (1 member, 20 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 851,885 Year: 6,921/19,786 Month: 1,462/1,581 Week: 284/393 Day: 8/99 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   My problem with evolution
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3171 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 5 of 120 (23005)
11-17-2002 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by robinrohan
11-17-2002 12:59 PM


As far as I know it is the other way around. At least until someone can tell authortiatively that one can compute around any "black" particle Newton defined in the Opticks and then it would not be clear what created what. Seems like with Democritus and the current atomism it is MIND (Anaxagors) that created matter (nuclear bomb) but if a Chinese poster knows otherwise, well, let me, western electric, etc know.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by robinrohan, posted 11-17-2002 12:59 PM robinrohan has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by robinrohan, posted 11-17-2002 4:57 PM Brad McFall has not yet responded

    
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3171 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 18 of 120 (23132)
11-18-2002 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by robinrohan
11-17-2002 5:52 PM


Is genetic variability discontinuous fundamentally or only any appearing so etc becuase we only *know* it emprically in your mind?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by robinrohan, posted 11-17-2002 5:52 PM robinrohan has not yet responded

    
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3171 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 31 of 120 (23244)
11-19-2002 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by robinrohan
11-19-2002 8:16 AM


On you r notion of physics... how do you know that "electricity" in the nerves is not only needed to set up a geometry that quantum thinking has repudiated as to visualization? And that we confused rather the "image" with the "thought of the image" (Hume's "idea of idea"??). I spent some considerable time trying to think if Tesla's light bulb "filament" does not transipriationally if not think produce melatin distribution in living organisms. It is true that the "thought" of a snake is no hamster but to philosohize as a bat? well why not??? I dont think the computer analogy need hold up all the way to the notion of the minds that created quantum stuff. They just tried very quickly to use the older innersight of space and time IN THE PHYSICS but when thinking of genes this is still needed despite Wheeler, Bohr, Bohm etc. Fredkin etc etc.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by robinrohan, posted 11-19-2002 8:16 AM robinrohan has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by robinrohan, posted 11-20-2002 1:22 AM Brad McFall has not yet responded

    
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 3171 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 32 of 120 (23245)
11-19-2002 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by John
11-19-2002 10:45 AM


Kaufmann was motivated by random blinking lights in terms of genes and chemistry. I never was. I would prefer to sit with Kant's judgement asthetically.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by John, posted 11-19-2002 10:45 AM John 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