Ok, found your question. I really did not mean to avoid it. Sorry. Ok, single-celled. It is odd that they seem to possess the ability to make decisions to survive.
Oh really? Where?
You are also refusing to self-correct when shown conceptual errors.
See this link
I missed the part where Allah gives life to all living things. Actually, I am not going to read over the entire post. Please extract your point and paste it here.
Ok, so what do you think?
-
Do single-celled organisms have the capacity to “make” those decisions, or is it something they do without intent? Could they make a conscious choice to stop living?
-
Do fungi or plants make the choice to survive and reproduce?
-
Can animals with some sort of intelligence consider altering evolution to increase the likelihood of surviving and reproducing?
I think we can both agree that the answer to all three of these questions is no. Therefore, the heritable change over time (evolution) is not something they are intentionally manipulating to achieve survivorship. The heritable change over time is something that happens regardless of intent. Thus, we can say that the “goal” or “outcome” of surviving is still consistent with the idea that heritable change over time does not work through pre-selected pathways geared toward survival. There is no logical inconsistency here. Organisms evolve, not because they are trying to, but because (in my opinion) that’s how God set up the laws of nature.
There is danger lurking in that statement. What does “surviving” entail?
You are funny. If the Koran says Allah is the creator (just like the Bible says Yahweh is the creator), logically it follows that both Allah and Yahweh are creators and life-givers. So I ask you, how do we know who is telling the truth?
Well, that is easy to tell. But you are in the wrong thread. We discussed all that just last week. The God of the Hebrews is the only true and living God.
Where is the evidence to show that the God of the Hebrews is the true one?
1 Like
While I obviously reject the notion that you have shown any conceptual errors on my part, I appreciate your admission that you refuse to accept any corrections given to you. And with that, I’m going to stop engaging with you before the mods get angry with me.
Bye.
2 Likes
One at a time. First answer.
Sorry, but I honestly see some intent here. I am thinking of the post in Evolution News where a Neutrophil is chasing a bacterium.
Ok perhaps that is a good idea.
Narrative is compelling, and it’s how humans make meaning.
‘Survival of the fittest’ is a narrative concept, and so is the notion that survival includes purpose or intention.
A proper scientific understanding of the modern evolutionary synthesis does not include these narratives.
And yet, in popularising, scientists and science communicators may use these compelling narratives to introduce people to a story.
I’m quite happy to ‘concede’ that only creationism includes teleology. It’s no concession at all, just an accurate explanation of the science.
I hope there is enough room for the both of us. I am done too.
1 Like
Oh, ok. I am disappointed.
Don’t worry. I don’t take that as a concession on your part. I understand where you are coming from. Too, I understand that narrative skews meaning and can subtract from reality. It’s just that your reality and mine are no where close to alignment. I don’t mind saying you are wrong and you don’t mind saying I am wrong.
#2
No, but the tendency for all living things is decline, entropy, death. I am saying that it seems there would have to be a struggle of some sort to survive.
Odd, but I just was recently reminded that it was old Darwin himself who proposed the idea that plants have a brain of sorts, in their root system. When I watched a documentary where they had cut out that portion of the root that sends electrical impulses, the root - which earlier seemed to be strangely enough “making decisions” - suddenly was no longer able to make those decisions, but went off into erratic growth.
This is a loaded question. Even you must agree with that because I would almost have to agree with evolution to even take a stab at it. Let me think for awhile on this one.