Consciousness & evolution

[torridon]

You cannot offer mechanisms as causes.  Causes define mechanisms, not the other way around.  Mechanisms cannot arise spontaneously by themselves.

You guys are mixing up the 'how' and the 'why'.

So what is your answer to the 'Why' question ?

[ekim]

So what is your answer to the 'Why' question ?

One answer, from Hinduism, might be that there is no reason why.  Brahman or Conscious Intelligence is engaged in Lila or creative play with infinite potential, of which, what we call 'evolution' is just a small part.  Unlike, as suggested with the Abrahamic God, there is no designing involved.

[Sriram]

The mechanism of natural selection is a simple logical consequence of having things that reproduce with inheritance and variation in an environment with limited resources. The "survival instinct" is the logical consequence of natural selection.

This has been explained to you multiple times, why don't you actually address the explanations given instead of just making assertions?

You are again talking of mechanisms. Mechanisms arise because something wants to survive and reproduce. The need to survive and reproduce, which we call as instincts....are the basic reason for evolution.  These are primary. Evolution is just a mechanism, not a cause.

The cause is the basic instinct. Why and how these instincts arise is the basic question. They have to be induced in the organism in some way. This is what we call its consciousness. It has to be extra-physical.

[Sriram]

So what is your answer to the 'Why' question ?

That is a complex answer involving spiritual evolution, reincarnation, several celestial worlds and the one Universal Consciousness and many more things. Take up yogic practice and theory and you will understand that.

More to the point, evolution is just a mechanism not a cause. Consciousness that is fundamental to life, is the cause of the survival, reproduction and parental instincts. These instincts lead to a fight for survival, leading to the process of evolution.

[Stranger]

You are again talking of mechanisms. Mechanisms arise because something wants to survive and reproduce. The need to survive and reproduce, which we call as instincts....are the basic reason for evolution.  These are primary. Evolution is just a mechanism, not a cause.

This is just more thought-free foot-stamping. The instincts arise because of natural selection (and of course mechanisms can cause things), in the way I (and others) have already explained and you've totally ignored. Why don't you actually address the explanation instead of just repeating your baseless dogma?

Why and how these instincts arise is the basic question. They have to be induced in the organism in some way.

We know how they arise and how they are introduced into the population. It's blindingly obvious how they do once you get reproduction with inheritance and variation and hence natural selection.

This is what we call its consciousness. It has to be extra-physical.

Baseless nonsense.

[ProfessorDavey]

You cannot offer mechanisms as causes.  Causes define mechanisms, not the other way around.  Mechanisms cannot arise spontaneously by themselves.

You guys are mixing up the 'how' and the 'why'.

To suggest 'why' is a relevant question assumes conscious intent and therefore yet more anthropocentric thinking. Given that there is no evidence that the process of evolution is based on conscious intent rather than simply a mechanistic phenomenon, then the issue of 'why' is moot.

Sure 'instinct' and 'intent' in species are known to be consequences of evolution and can have evolutionary benefit in terms of survival and reproduction, but that is a different question.

[torridon]

That is a complex answer involving spiritual evolution, reincarnation, several celestial worlds and the one Universal Consciousness and many more things. Take up yogic practice and theory and you will understand that.

More to the point, evolution is just a mechanism not a cause. Consciousness that is fundamental to life, is the cause of the survival, reproduction and parental instincts. These instincts lead to a fight for survival, leading to the process of evolution.

Most of that is baseless conjecture, though, it is not derived from evidence. We don 't have any evidence for a universal consciousness and we don't have any evidence for multiple celestial worlds, whatever you mean by that.  And if 'reincarnation' for example was the underlying cause that explains observations, we can still ask the Why question to that - why does reincarnation or spiritual evolution exist ?

[ProfessorDavey]

Take up yogic practice and theory and you will understand that.

Yet more anthropocentric non-sense. What relevance does yogic practice and theory have to the vast majority of life on this planet (e.g. the oak tree in my front garden or the soil bacteria in the beds in my back garden), let alone non-living entities on this planet and beyond.

[Sriram]

This is just more thought-free foot-stamping. The instincts arise because of natural selection (and of course mechanisms can cause things), in the way I (and others) have already explained and you've totally ignored. Why don't you actually address the explanation instead of just repeating your baseless dogma?

We know how they arise and how they are introduced into the population. It's blindingly obvious how they do once you get reproduction with inheritance and variation and hence natural selection.

Baseless nonsense.

Instincts don't arise due to NS.  Did DNA start to replicate due to  natural selection? That is rubbish.

[Sriram]

Most of that is baseless conjecture, though, it is not derived from evidence. We don 't have any evidence for a universal consciousness and we don't have any evidence for multiple celestial worlds, whatever you mean by that.  And if 'reincarnation' for example was the underlying cause that explains observations, we can still ask the Why question to that - why does reincarnation or spiritual evolution exist ?

I agree that it is philosophical conjecture (hypothesis)....but not without basis. There is plenty of reason to believe that life has arisen and evolved due to conscious intent. There is evidence for life after death and reincarnation.

Why and how it all happens we may not know with any degree of accuracy (everything is not physics), but that is the right direction to start thinking. Pure materialism will take us nowhere.

[Sriram]

To suggest 'why' is a relevant question assumes conscious intent and therefore yet more anthropocentric thinking. Given that there is no evidence that the process of evolution is based on conscious intent rather than simply a mechanistic phenomenon, then the issue of 'why' is moot.

Sure 'instinct' and 'intent' in species are known to be consequences of evolution and can have evolutionary benefit in terms of survival and reproduction, but that is a different question.

Evolution is a consequence of instinct and intent, not the other way around. Evolution is only a mechanism.

[torridon]

Instincts don't arise due to NS.  Did DNA start to replicate due to  natural selection? That is rubbish.

Things don't replicate because of natural selection; nobody claims that,  Natural Selection acts upon the variation that inevitably arises from reproduction, given that reproduction is imperfect.

[Sriram]

Yet more anthropocentric non-sense. What relevance does yogic practice and theory have to the vast majority of life on this planet (e.g. the oak tree in my front garden or the soil bacteria in the beds in my back garden), let alone non-living entities on this planet and beyond.

How yoga is relevant is a lengthy discussion requiring a background in spirituality. Some other time maybe. 

[torridon]

Evolution is a consequence of instinct and intent, not the other way around. Evolution is only a mechanism.

That doesn't make any sense. Nothing evolved by intention. Do all the new strains of coronavirus arise because the virus has intentions ?  Something as simple as a virus is incapable of complex mind states like desire and intention.

[Sriram]

That doesn't make any sense. Nothing evolved by intention. Do all the new strains of coronavirus arise because the virus has intentions ?  Something as simple as a virus is incapable of complex mind states like desire and intention.

We have discussed all these things before. Consciousness is not just about wakeful human consciousness. Consciousness is very complex with many layers. There is a common consciousness which coordinates all life and ensures the ecological balance. Viruses and bacteria etc are all a part of this.

This is not a new idea. Many western people have also proposed this. 

[Stranger]

Instincts don't arise due to NS.

More foot-stamping.

Why do you continue to ignore the actual explanation...?

Did DNA start to replicate due to  natural selection? That is rubbish.

Nobody suggested that replication started due to natural selection - and it certainly wasn't due to instinct or consciousness either.

Yet again: something started to replicate for entirely chemical reasons. Let's say it's an RNA strand like this (which actually does replicate if given the right chemical environment):

NNNNNNUGCUCGAUUGGUAACAGUUUGAAUGGGUUGAAGUAU–GAGACCGNNNNNN

Obviously it doesn't have any instincts, it's just a molecule. All we then need is for the replication to be imperfect sometimes so we have variation. Once we have variation, some replicators can be better than others at replicating in the environment. If resources are (or become) limited with respect to the population, so not every individual survives, then obviously those that are better at surviving and replicating will come to dominate.

Over time, variations that aid survival will build up in the population and each individual will have accumulated lots of individual traits that aid its survival and reproduction in its environment. At some point, some observer may look at all these traits and say "oh look, these things have a 'survival instinct'", and if they don't understand natural selection and think it's just a metaphor, then they may jump to daft conclusion about that being the cause, rather than the effect.

[Sriram]

It is DNA replication that is the source of the reproductive and survival instinct.  This should be obvious.

All your explanations are just the mechanism by which it happens. The cause behind it is consciousness.

[torridon]

I agree that it is philosophical conjecture (hypothesis)....but not without basis. There is plenty of reason to believe that life has arisen and evolved due to conscious intent. There is evidence for life after death and reincarnation.

That's back to front thinking.  Conscious intent is a complex state and yet simple logic and observation tells us that complex states derive from simpler states. You've seen that large houses can be made of small bricks, but have you ever seen small bricks that are made of large houses ?  The idea that the universe came about by conscious intent fails for the same reason. Intentions are a complex product of a slowly evolving universe.  Do you think intentions can self-substantiate out of nothing ?

[Stranger]

It is DNA replication that is the source of the reproductive and survival instinct.  This should be obvious.

It's obviously nonsense. The mechanics of replication can't produce an 'instinct', you need natural selection for anything remotely like that.

The cause behind it is consciousness.

More reasoning- and evidence-free assertion.   

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

All your explanations are just the mechanism by which it happens.

There’s no “just” about it, but essentially yes – the ToE explains very powerfully how speciation occurs. Your why question though is only valid if you can show first that evolution is purposive - for which claim there's no evidence at all.

The cause behind it is consciousness.

And that’s just a repetition of your mindless faith claim. A “consciousness behind it” is something the ToE doesn’t require, that has no evidence for its existence at all, and that you can only conclude if you rely on false arguments (or, more often in your case, on no argument at all).

You can of course believe any unqualified faith claim to be true if you want to, as can I. If you expect anyone to take the claim seriously though then you must justify it with something other than bad reasoning and wishful thinking. And that’s your problem.     

[ekim]

That's back to front thinking.  Conscious intent is a complex state and yet simple logic and observation tells us that complex states derive from simpler states. You've seen that large houses can be made of small bricks, but have you ever seen small bricks that are made of large houses ?  The idea that the universe came about by conscious intent fails for the same reason. Intentions are a complex product of a slowly evolving universe.  Do you think intentions can self-substantiate out of nothing ?

I think that a Hindu view is that consciousness is the simplest of 'states' and is omnipresent.  Complexity arises through its interaction with the physical.  To use your analogy, it takes a consciousness to assemble the small bricks into a large house.  I suspect that the view comes from yogic practices which attempt to be in union with that simple conscious state which is blissful.  This is possibly what is behind the Jesus saying 'Whosoever shall not receive the Kingdom of Heaven as a little child will not be able to enter therein' i.e. simplicity rather than mental complexity is the way.

[Stranger]

There is plenty of reason to believe that life has arisen and evolved due to conscious intent.

There is overwhelming evidence that conscious intent is the result of evolution. It's also worth pointing out that even if we were to accept some of the speculations you've posted, like Orch OR or IIT, they wouldn't actually change that conclusion.

[BeRational]

That is a complex answer involving spiritual evolution, reincarnation, several celestial worlds and the one Universal Consciousness and many more things. Take up yogic practice and theory and you will understand that.

More to the point, evolution is just a mechanism not a cause. Consciousness that is fundamental to life, is the cause of the survival, reproduction and parental instincts. These instincts lead to a fight for survival, leading to the process of evolution.

Why dies water want to freeze at low temperature

[Nearly Sane]

Why dies water want to freeze at low temperature

Because it wanted to get to another state.

[BeRational]

Because it wanted to get to another state.

Clearly that is the sort of thinking Sriram is using.