RE: Detecting design or intent in nature
January 6, 2015 at 6:29 pm
(This post was last modified: January 6, 2015 at 6:41 pm by Mudhammam.)
(January 6, 2015 at 5:25 pm)Heywood Wrote: Coyne is referring to the products of evolution not the evolutionary system itself. You either mis-understand what I am saying or you are misunderstanding what Coyne is saying. In this thread, when I say evolutionary systems require the existence of intellects, it has nothing to do with the products of the evolutionary system.I understand what you're saying and it makes zero sense because you're arguing that a product of evolution is required for evolution. If you find evidence of "intellects" in fossils of cyanobacteria or other early simple organisms, you'll have something to go on other than unproductive conjecture.
(January 6, 2015 at 5:32 pm)JuliaL Wrote: What am I missing here.Altruism benefits another individual but not the species, which is what we might expect to see, according to Coyne, if evolution was driving upwards on some "great chain of being," which is a common misconception of theists who think evolution is intentional.
Whatever happened to explaining altruism via kin selection?
Seems to me that any benefit to the kin at the expense of the adapted individual qualifies as a counter example here even if the benefit to the species via benefit to the kin is small.
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza