(February 8, 2014 at 6:05 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: It depends on the level of sentient awareness the "organics" possess the more intelligent specimens can perform acts of true altruism as demonstrated here.

How does that come even close to true altruism... I've covered this in the original post and within the thread. If you want further explanation please ask. Also, dolphins have been proven to be less intelligent due to recent studies in the past ten years. Size doesn't correlate with intelligence, and the dolphins brain is mostly full of matter which is used for insulation from the cold, not having much neural activity in comparison to the inner areas.

(February 7, 2014 at 1:47 pm)x2theone2x Wrote:

(February 6, 2014 at 3:55 pm)Chuck Wrote: Function requires a design. What everything in human has is is not function, for none of them are deseigned. They have properties which facilitates their interact in an undesigned system that involves much more than the human itself, but everything with which parts of the human can interact. They are no more selfish then a oxygen atom is selfish when combining with two hydrogen atoms to form water.

You are confusing outcome with intention.

Why do you assume function requires design, and it doesn't even matter as any basic evolution lecture will tell you that it acts like design. The watch makers argument here isn't going to work for you... The human heart developed to aid the human, take that heart and place into another mammal and it most likely won't work. The reason why we still have vestigial organs is due to evolution, or the framework of evolution to not get rid of that coding in case we may need it in the future. We are referring to organics here not atoms or molecules. I am not confusing "perceived" outcome with intention, both are directly required in the decision making process in humans.

Take a oxygen atom out of a water molecule and try to put it into a molecule that doesn't react with oxygen, and it will be rejected. So what? It doesn't mean oxygen has a function in water. It just so happen to possess the capability to react with hydrogen.

Basic lecture is basic, it tries to enlist your intellectual foibles to give you a slight leg up in beginning to conceptualize complex concepts, in much the same way your bed time stories about Santa Claus might give you a slight leg up in conceptualizing appropriate conduct. So don't think everything as described in basic lecture really stands up to thorough scrutiny.

(February 9, 2014 at 1:09 am)Chuck Wrote:

(February 7, 2014 at 1:47 pm)x2theone2x Wrote: Why do you assume function requires design, and it doesn't even matter as any basic evolution lecture will tell you that it acts like design. The watch makers argument here isn't going to work for you... The human heart developed to aid the human, take that heart and place into another mammal and it most likely won't work. The reason why we still have vestigial organs is due to evolution, or the framework of evolution to not get rid of that coding in case we may need it in the future. We are referring to organics here not atoms or molecules. I am not confusing "perceived" outcome with intention, both are directly required in the decision making process in humans.

Take a oxygen atom out of a water molecule and try to put it into a molecule that doesn't react with oxygen, and it will be rejected. So what? It doesn't mean oxygen has a function in water. It just so happen to possess the capability to react with hydrogen.

Basic lecture is basic, it tries to enlist your intellectual foibles to give you a slight leg up in beginning to conceptualize complex concepts, in much the same way your bed time stories about Santa Claus might give you a slight leg up in conceptualizing appropriate conduct. So don't think everything as described in basic lecture really stands up to thorough scrutiny.

I would simply disagree. An oxygen atom will not function with your proposed molecule because it doesn't, and it's function won't allow it, for reasons we should observe, and through trials we may be able to alter.

If my subconscious is benefitting me by making me bedridden... then my subconscious has a rather different understanding of 'beneficiary' actions.

Not that my opinion qualifies, as technically... I am not made of carbon.

---

(February 17, 2014 at 3:11 pm)x2theone2x Wrote: I would simply disagree. An oxygen atom will not function with your proposed molecule because it doesn't, and it's function won't allow it, for reasons we should observe, and through trials we may be able to alter.

Sounds like pseudoscience to me. Hey, I've got just the thing!

Bananas!


EVERYONE KNOWS this!