Hey,
@ Kyu: Thank you for replying.
I can only disagree with this one point. I think the program did have a programmed end result, namely its namesake "Methinks it is like a weasel,". The fact the the program carefully chose the one mutation that was in any way closer to the target phrase, and then started with only that phrase makes it very programmed (compared to the complexity of a more realistic model of the mutation process). I know that Dawkins did not state that it was an example of biological evolution, and did call it an 'artificial' selection process. I am just saying that I find the experiment to be strange and almost senseless. That it leaves a lot of room for speculative haberdashery. That even as a philosophical experiment it seems only to prove that something designed to produce a finished product, should indeed do such. That is just my interpretation of it though.
And, of course, Adrian. Thank you for helpfully posting the wiki for what i am referencing, I have read that page before. I heard about the experiment in Kitty Mitchels "Fire in the Equations", and also read Blind Watchmaker. I was pulling it out of the attic that is my memory. I appreciate that my question is 'rubbish' to you, and that you think (again) that I sound like an idiot.
Just for one sentence, I will try to drop the standards, and act as I feel you are; Why don't you actually post either a response to the question, or views on my opinion, or anything at all that is constructive to the overall conversation? (you may not come across as something with nothing intelligent to say)
Please, unless it is making some other, larger point, refrain from offering me any more of these 'tips'. I think they are just rudeness bordering on assumed ignorance and wiki links any ways.
And just so that the conversation does go somewhere... What about if the program did not select based on a final result, and just flew randomly? I think the experiment doesn't really prove that our random world could appear to be patterned, but that if it were truly random, the world as we think we know it could not exist as it seems too...? Some thoughts, what do you guys think?
Thank you kindly,
"Who says I like right angles any ways?",
-Pip
@ Kyu: Thank you for replying.
Quote:because I am fairly sure the simulations used DID NOT have a programmed end result (it could well have been a test condition but that isn't the same as a programmed end-result)
I can only disagree with this one point. I think the program did have a programmed end result, namely its namesake "Methinks it is like a weasel,". The fact the the program carefully chose the one mutation that was in any way closer to the target phrase, and then started with only that phrase makes it very programmed (compared to the complexity of a more realistic model of the mutation process). I know that Dawkins did not state that it was an example of biological evolution, and did call it an 'artificial' selection process. I am just saying that I find the experiment to be strange and almost senseless. That it leaves a lot of room for speculative haberdashery. That even as a philosophical experiment it seems only to prove that something designed to produce a finished product, should indeed do such. That is just my interpretation of it though.
And, of course, Adrian. Thank you for helpfully posting the wiki for what i am referencing, I have read that page before. I heard about the experiment in Kitty Mitchels "Fire in the Equations", and also read Blind Watchmaker. I was pulling it out of the attic that is my memory. I appreciate that my question is 'rubbish' to you, and that you think (again) that I sound like an idiot.
Just for one sentence, I will try to drop the standards, and act as I feel you are; Why don't you actually post either a response to the question, or views on my opinion, or anything at all that is constructive to the overall conversation? (you may not come across as something with nothing intelligent to say)
Please, unless it is making some other, larger point, refrain from offering me any more of these 'tips'. I think they are just rudeness bordering on assumed ignorance and wiki links any ways.
And just so that the conversation does go somewhere... What about if the program did not select based on a final result, and just flew randomly? I think the experiment doesn't really prove that our random world could appear to be patterned, but that if it were truly random, the world as we think we know it could not exist as it seems too...? Some thoughts, what do you guys think?
Thank you kindly,
"Who says I like right angles any ways?",
-Pip
