(January 6, 2015 at 12:12 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Pages and pages ago it was brought to your attention that you do not understand necessity or evolved systems. I see that hasn't changed. Your own examples....are examples of things which do not require intelligence. Computational systems (and the products of computational systems - such as simulations) -do not require intelligence for their existence or efficacy-. You've confused presence with necessity. If I indulge your fantasy, correlation with causation.
You think of computers as "something we create" rather than what they are, principles we -implement-. We're present, when a computer does work. We aren't the reason that it does work. We design the implemenation - the architecture..but all of the architecture in the world doesn't mean shit without the principles that underlie it which are in no way indebted to us or any thinking thing for their existence. Computers that we -do not make- exist. Similarly, we are present when things evolve. That doesn't mean that our intelligence (or any intelligence) makes them evolve, or is required to create a system in which they can evolve.
Your counter argument was merely contradiction and no substance. It reminded me of this:
