Evolution

[Nay_Sayer]

Hi.  I'm not a regular here (I'm irregular) so we haven't chatted before, I don't know you, so please forgive me if I am making an incorrect assumption that you are younger than you are.  I make this assumption of youth based on your mastery of English.

So I wonder, if you are still of school age, do you do your own homework or do you get other people to do it for you?

English is not my mother language that is why my English is not that good.

In other words your assumption is incorrect.  
If you also put me down on the bases that what I did write is wrong without coming with a counter claim that make sense then you fail twice.  

I can say with near 100% confidence if you wrote in your native tongue it would still be inane stupidity, That's the miracle of idiocy it translates across all languages.

[The Grand Nudger]

My understanding is that evolution is driven by the desire to be free from that chain of imperfection.
The physical aspect is only the result of our progress or failing.

Your understanding is wholly incorrect. Whatever it is you're babbling about with avalanches and IRL cabbage patch kids and chains has nothing to do with evolution. If we're going to discuss that, instead..come up with a different name for it.

The "physical aspect", in point of fact, is the -only- aspect described by evolutionary theory. The rest is whatever religion you found at the bottom of your fruit loops.

---

I think it's interesting to ponder how consciousness might have come about in the evolutionary process. Why would consciousness be selected for? It's a good question.

It is, another good one..is why or how it could be selected against.  It's worthwhile to note that we know of no sessile organisms that possess the trait.  

Would you agree that a bacterium has little or nothing of what we would call consciousness? Consider simple, single-celled organisms. There's no reason to think they are any more conscious than any one of our particular cells, right?

Agreed. 

To me, the answer is simple: consciousness was selected for in humans and other vertebrates. It serves no purpose for simple life forms and therefore was not selected for.

I'm an optimist..but, I think that if simple(r*) organisms were conscious it would be as useful to them as it is to us.  The practical utility of conscious experience surrounds you.  Plants don't possess it because anything that would have lead to it would have been actively selected against despite it's utility on grounds of it's sheer liability. 

A bit off the original topic, but it's an interesting question. Does sensation alone lead to consciousness, or are cognitive abilities required too? My first answer is that sensation alone = consciousness, but I could be wrong about that. I haven't really thought about it much. Any thoughts?

Sensation, entirely unlike consciousness...is ubiquitous, even among (especially among) sessile organisms, like plants.

[Little Rik]

1. Consciousness is a physical process. It is, ultimately based on organic chemistry.

UTTER GARBAGE Pol.

How on hell can something abstract as the consciousness can come under the physicality side?
Did anybody ever explained to you about the difference between abstract and material-physical?  

2. Evolution is a theory of biology. It is a scientific description of how species change over time.

Again science only study the physical aspect of evolution which means that what science know today is but a small part of total evolution.  

3. Except for any genetic aspect of consciousness, there is no aspect of evolution that is affected by consciousness. Evolution is a matter of how genetics changes in populations over time.

Science reach that limit.
That does not means that there is a lot more to be learn.  

4. Because of the improbability of reversals of certain types of genetic changes, evolution tends not to go in reverse. So, getting animals from plants or vice versa (which would require a complete restructuring of everything from the basic metabolism to basic structural aspects) is impossible (well, technically possible but at such a low probability it won't happen).

That is only true regarding matter, plants and animals but is totally wrong regarding humans.
Humans are not driven by the low of nature because they have the free will which allow them to go in every direction ( to gain or to lose so up or down in their evolution).
Animals are driven by instinct so they only can go up.  

5. That your understanding is that evolution is driven by a desire to be free only shows how little you understand about evolution.

What are you doing right now mate?

Aren't you here in the forum to learn something?
And doesn't that learning help you in your quest for more knowledge?
And does not the quest for more knowledge make you free from ignorance?

Can you see that you contradict yourself at every move that you make?  

---

My understanding is that evolution is driven by the desire to be free from that chain of imperfection.
The physical aspect is only the result of our progress or failing.

Your understanding is wholly incorrect.  Whatever it is you're babbling about with avalanches and IRL cabbage patch kids and chains has nothing to do with evolution.  If we're going to discuss that, instead..come up with a different name for it.

The "physical aspect", in point of fact, is the -only- aspect described by evolutionary theory.  The rest is whatever religion you found at the bottom of your fruit loops.

The "physical aspect", in point of fact, is the -only- aspect described by evolutionary theory.......................blah, blah, blah..........

True Kem but guess why?
You wouldn't know Kem so allow LR to explain that to you.
It is because (as I already said in different posts) physical science only study the physical aspect of the issue.
I guess you never thought about that Kem, did you?  

As far as what religions say they can say whatever they like.
Nothing to do with me.  




(color mine)

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Little Dik, you're a dumbass.

[Amarok]

[Little Rik]

Little Dik, you're a dumbass.

I guess life become a total misery when you reach an old age and you realize that you accomplished absolutely nothing.  

Be happy son maybe the next life will be better for you.

[Amarok]

Little Dik, you're a dumbass.

I guess life become a total misery when you reach an old age and you realize that you accomplished absolutely nothing.  

Be happy son maybe the next life will be better for you.  

Lol you need another life Dicky because the one you have now is an utter failure . Too bad all the actual evidence shows there are no doe over oh well   

But then again it would not matter anyway as you would be a failure if you lived a 100 times .

[Cod]

I guess life become a total misery when you reach an old age and you realize that you accomplished absolutely nothing.  

Be happy son maybe the next life will be better for you.  

Lol you need another life Dicky because the one you have now is an utter failure . Too bad all the actual evidence shows there are no doe over oh well   

But then again it would not matter anyway as you would be a failure if you lived a 100 times .

But what if Rik comes back as a transgender volleyball player? Success!!

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Little Dik, you're a dumbass.

I guess life become a total misery when you reach an old age and you realize that you accomplished absolutely nothing.  

I feel sorry for your parents, too.

[Amarok]

Lol you need another life Dicky because the one you have now is an utter failure . Too bad all the actual evidence shows there are no doe over oh well   

But then again it would not matter anyway as you would be a failure if you lived a 100 times .

But what if Rik comes back as a transgender volleyball player? Success!!

Simply in his first match he would break his back . And be forced to retire . Because his existence is linked to failure .