RE: Natural Order and Science
February 16, 2016 at 8:12 am
(This post was last modified: February 16, 2016 at 8:15 am by bennyboy.)
Harris, given ANY thing, we expect it to exist in the context of framework. If you look at the framework in turn as a thing (which it is), then you'd expect it to be part of another framework. In comes infinite regress, right?
You say that chance does not produce information. This is fair enough, because no state is "information" unless someone is around to make use of it. However, your mistake is a misunderstanding of the philosophical implications of evolution. Evolution is the creation of patterns through chance crossed with the variable persistence of those patterns in their environment.
It is fairly clear that everything in our universe is as it is because of the interactions of the stuff in the universe. So we are left to ask-- why is the universe such that it arrived at me, sitting here typing this message?
The correct answer to this is "I don't know." Anything beyond that is speculation, and in the case of a religious academic, pedantic speculation. We can all try to extend what little we DO know into the unknown and see what ideas it brings. You know something about intelligent life, information and patterns. Others know something about physical properties, scientific principles, etc. But BOTH sides, when attempting to look beyond the bounds of the observable, are just making shit up. And that goes for the physicalists, here, too, not just you.
You say that chance does not produce information. This is fair enough, because no state is "information" unless someone is around to make use of it. However, your mistake is a misunderstanding of the philosophical implications of evolution. Evolution is the creation of patterns through chance crossed with the variable persistence of those patterns in their environment.
It is fairly clear that everything in our universe is as it is because of the interactions of the stuff in the universe. So we are left to ask-- why is the universe such that it arrived at me, sitting here typing this message?
The correct answer to this is "I don't know." Anything beyond that is speculation, and in the case of a religious academic, pedantic speculation. We can all try to extend what little we DO know into the unknown and see what ideas it brings. You know something about intelligent life, information and patterns. Others know something about physical properties, scientific principles, etc. But BOTH sides, when attempting to look beyond the bounds of the observable, are just making shit up. And that goes for the physicalists, here, too, not just you.
