|
BlueCoyote
Beyond


Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 17 days
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: Icelander]
#19160606 - 11/19/13 04:49 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Icelander said: Evolution happens every day in every way.
Wrong and that's what folk here have been trying to explain to you.
Ah, it always happens then, when one dies (young,) without procreating.... Not happens every day for an individuum, but happens every day multiple times (in [almost] every way) on planet earth
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,534
|
|
The term genetic drift goes with that every day issue. Evolution is more like selection by disaster because of morphological suitability and then living to breed after that.
Without the drift there might not be a surviving variant or mutant, but it is the disaster that usually flips the daily drift into evolution.
--------------------
_ π§ _
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
everyone is making this way more complicated than it is.
consciousness started off with very little awareness and evolved with life towards a greater understanding, a higher state of consciousness with which the universe becomes able to witness, reflect, and figure itself out which in turn leads to more awareness/consciousness.
the point of view expressed in OP is that evolution of life happens with purpose, that purpose being the development of consciousness first and foremost, since for anything to even exist as a living thing it must have some sort of consciousness, must have some basic awareness from which to process and interact with its environment and that this awareness is constantly growing/evolving with every moment.
If evolution happens strictly at random without any input from consciousness or awareness of environment, than how are favorable mutations even possible?
are you so certain that information retained from living does not become ingrained into DNA and passed on to offspring in some way shape or form?
if consciousness has little to do with evolution than why did consciousness develop into what it has, and why is it that this development of consciousness in humans has led to the ability to directly alter DNA and thus directly through our awareness of the genome, alter the course of our own evolution and the evolution of other living things as well..all due to the development of consciousness.
This proves that consciousness evolves first and foremost, and all other evolutionary mutations happen due to the information processed through awareness (consciousness) for the goal of becoming more conscious..as is proven with humans, us possessing the greatest awareness of the universe which surrounds us and due to this have been able to pwn over every other land animal and direct the course of our evolution.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
White Beard

Registered: 08/13/11
Posts: 6,325
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx] 2
#19161385 - 11/19/13 07:13 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said: If evolution happens strictly at random without any input from consciousness or awareness of environment, than how are favorable mutations even possible?
Evolution is not random. The genetic mutations are random, but the process which chooses which random mutations live on and which die out is a non-random selection process based on whether the mutation 1.) benefits the survival of the organism, and 2.) benefit the reproductive ability of the organism. This process doesn't need conscious decision making to occur.
Edited by White Beard (11/19/13 07:14 PM)
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
and the development of consciousness has nothing to do with increased survival and reproductive abilities?
how do you not see that the evolution of consciousness has everything to do with increasing survival and successful reproduction? as without consciousness no amount of living is possible, since for something to be considered living it must have some type of consciousness.
conscious decision making is not the same thing as consciousness, I have no idea why you would try to use that as an argument that consciousness has little to do with evolution.
also there is plenty of evidence which suggests that conscious decision making has everything to do with survival of the organism and reproductive success. I figured that would be common sense but I figured wrong. since living things make decisions in regards towards its own survival all the time and since the same happens when choosing a mate (sexual reproduction).
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
White Beard

Registered: 08/13/11
Posts: 6,325
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx] 2
#19161682 - 11/19/13 08:04 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I believe organisms without central nervous systems aren't conscious, such as plants and microorganisms. Consciousness plays a part in evolution, but it isn't necessary. Just like how legs play a part in evolution, but aren't necessary. Or teeth. Some organisms have fins, where as some have legs, some have teeth, where as some have proboscis, some are conscious, some are not. Whether an organism has one of these traits is dependent on whether one of it's ancestors survival or reproductive ability benefited from having one of these traits.
Let me clarify what I said earlier. The process of natural selection occurs with, or without consciousness.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery



Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
without consciousness there would be no way that any thing could be considered alive, since consciousness is simply a word we use to describe the state or fact of being conscious (aware) of external reality. plants and single celled organisms must have some type of awareness of its surroundings or there would be no way a plant or anything could successfully interact with its environment..in fact without a consciousness there would be no interaction at all since with all life we see some type of reaction to environmental conditions this means that life must be aware on even a most basic level of its surroundings to be considered a living thing.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
White Beard

Registered: 08/13/11
Posts: 6,325
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19161994 - 11/19/13 08:50 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Something doesn't need to be aware to react to it's environment. An example is a machine where you put in an input and it gives you an output. I don't believe the machine has any inner experience. I could code a simple program that does this, but it doesn't mean I just created an aware, sentient being.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
|
bad example since the machine was made and programmed with conscious intent to react according to the parameters setup and made possible by consciousness. 
also you described a non living thing which has nothing to do with an organisms awareness of its surroundings. without basic awareness of the reality which a living thing finds itself in that thing could not live because it would not have the capacity to react (evolve) to conditions which would be detrimental towards its survival. without the basic awareness of survival (advance to safety retreat from unsafe) than survival would not be possible.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
Hobozen


Registered: 11/03/11
Posts: 10,634
Loc:
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19162792 - 11/19/13 11:01 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
hTx said: evolution does accelerate when viewed from the understanding that evolution happens with consciousness as the medium. This is obvious by the own acceleration factor in technology. its based on the same reasoning, the more aware life becomes, the more aware life can become..the greater the awareness, the greater the complexity.
You can see this with technology, which should be considered apart of evolution as well since we invented technology as our awareness grew..the greater the awareness the greater the technology, and the greater the technology the greater the awareness which is further proof of the acceleration of evolution.
What if it's that... the population is growing, more people with education are putting their minds to work, and that's why we are seeing exponential growth in technology? And not because of "greater awareness", as vague and ambiguous as that might sound? Awareness doesn't seem to be accelerating at a faster rate. We're still very ape like and barbaric. I see no evidence of consciousness changing more rapidly based on those observations alone.
I went through a similar phase when drug-induced epiphanies were projected out into the world/universe. Things got quite messy.
|
cez

Registered: 08/04/09
Posts: 5,854
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: Hobozen]
#19162888 - 11/19/13 11:29 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|

Why is everybody assuming op is on a drug-induced rant? His argument seems legit to me, but so does everybody's counter arguments so I don't know what to make of this thread...I'm an ignoramus
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: cez]
#19162912 - 11/19/13 11:40 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
|
Hobozen


Registered: 11/03/11
Posts: 10,634
Loc:
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: cez]
#19162927 - 11/19/13 11:46 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
drug-induced epiphany β drug-induced rant. the rant could have came after the epiphany. but this is getting into sketchy territory so I'm gonna zip it for now.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: Hobozen]
#19162940 - 11/19/13 11:50 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
while I agree to a point, I would think that greater awareness of reality and the pursuit of greater awareness resulted in technologies and that these technologies help lead to new knowledge which in turn leads to new technology and so on and so forth..
humans have come a long way in regards towards collective consciousness..I figured that would be rather obvious. Just ten thousand years ago we learned how to write (time-bind) allowing for much more efficient passing and development of ideas and accelerated the process of understanding the universe (consciousness).
the evolution of consciousness can also be seen with the changes and advances we have made in regards towards civilization as a whole..take the internet for example...and more recently bitcoin.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻



Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19162963 - 11/19/13 11:56 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Evolution is a change in the genetic frequencyQuote:
hTx said: Most materialists maintain that evolution is a strictly physical phenomena, and that human consciousness emerged due to the physical evolution of the brain.
I think its much more accurate to say that consciousness is whats evolving, and that physical changes follow, not the other way around.
This happens at an ever accelerating pace.
Proprietors of evolution claiming that consciousness has little to do with it, or subscribe to the whole 'survival of the fittest' type of logic surrounding evolution either cannot see or refuse to see that consciousness has been the driving factor in all living things, and that consciousness has evolved and is evolving always.
The brain was said to have evolved due to the cephalization of ganglia towards the anterior region of organisms as a consequence of bilateral symmetry.
I guess that it so happens that the cephalization of ganglia is a good thing and increased in genetic frequency because the cephalization improved the chances that the organism would reproduce it's genes through offspring.
So say like 5 puppies are born, they are fairly similar but there is a slight difference in the size of their brains, the one with the biggest brain has a slight advantage over the one with the smallest brain in reproducing. So when that animal reproduces it will produce more puppies with a slightly increased brain size, and one of the brains may even be bigger than the initial puppy and have an even greater chance at reproducing, so on and so forth over many generations.
Do I believe in the theory? No, but it is as closest as we have with the most evidence so it seems most likely.
If you talk to some cladist they may say that the fossils record is inadequate evidence when you are judging by the appearances of the organisms, rather than examining the DNA, because correlation doesn't equate to causation, or there are many organism that appear to be of the same common ancestors by appearance, but when examining the DNA they are not related at all.
Many life forms do not have brains and they are still said to evolve . . .
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: cez]
#19162968 - 11/19/13 11:57 PM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
cez said:

Why is everybody assuming op is on a drug-induced rant? His argument seems legit to me, but so does everybody's counter arguments so I don't know what to make of this thread...I'm an ignoramus 
yah I was wondering the same thing like four different posters have called this a drug induced rant what the hell guys.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: teknix]
#19163009 - 11/20/13 12:11 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
teknix said: Evolution is a change in the genetic frequencyQuote:
hTx said: Most materialists maintain that evolution is a strictly physical phenomena, and that human consciousness emerged due to the physical evolution of the brain.
I think its much more accurate to say that consciousness is whats evolving, and that physical changes follow, not the other way around.
This happens at an ever accelerating pace.
Proprietors of evolution claiming that consciousness has little to do with it, or subscribe to the whole 'survival of the fittest' type of logic surrounding evolution either cannot see or refuse to see that consciousness has been the driving factor in all living things, and that consciousness has evolved and is evolving always.
The brain was said to have evolved due to the cephalization of ganglia towards the anterior region of organisms as a consequence of bilateral symmetry.
I guess that it so happens that the cephalization of ganglia is a good thing and increased in genetic frequency because the cephalization improved the chances that the organism would reproduce it's genes through offspring.
So say like 5 puppies are born, they are fairly similar but there is a slight difference in the size of their brains, the one with the biggest brain has a slight advantage over the one with the smallest brain in reproducing. So when that animal reproduces it will produce more puppies with a slightly increased brain size, and one of the brains may even be bigger than the initial puppy and have an even greater chance at reproducing, so on and so forth over many generations.
Do I believe in the theory? No, but it is as closest as we have with the most evidence so it seems most likely.
If you talk to some cladist they may say that the fossils record is inadequate evidence when you are judging by the appearances of the organisms, rather than examining the DNA, because correlation doesn't equate to causation, or there are many organism that appear to be of the same common ancestors by appearance, but when examining the DNA they are not related at all.
Many life forms do not have brains and they are still said to evolve . . .
right which means that consciousness isn't a secondary function of the brain but that a brain was needed in order for consciousness to develop itself into greater complexity. the trend towards higher consciousness needed bigger brains to process information more efficiently. proof that consciousness was the primary and the physical evolution of the brain was secondary as consciousness became more complex, so did the organisms.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
Hobozen


Registered: 11/03/11
Posts: 10,634
Loc:
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: hTx]
#19163058 - 11/20/13 12:28 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I somehow tied this in with your Singularity thread where you said that "the amount of change occurring in the next five years will be so tremendous that it will match the definition of a true singularity." Are you referring to evolution here, having also stated in this thread, "I think its much more accurate to say that consciousness is whats evolving, and that physical changes follow, not the other way around.
This happens at an ever accelerating pace. "?
|
hTx
(:



Registered: 03/27/13
Posts: 5,724
Loc: Space-time
|
Re: Evolution Dogma [Re: Hobozen]
#19163231 - 11/20/13 01:18 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
well, no not really although I can see how you made the correlation now that you mention it. I suppose its possible take for example if we developed a way to merge with computers..or if AI developed. chain reaction type of change? but what is time but a chain reaction of change?
I don't know but with singular change who knows what will happen.
-------------------- zen by age ten times six hundred lifetimes Light up the darkness.
|
|