I'd like to think that natural selection is not random. — Cidat
natural selection is not random. — Cidat
Random —> unpredictable; however, unpredictable –/–> random
(e.g. chaotic systems). — 180 Proof
If you are able to explain in clear, precise, grammatically correct Englsih, and lacking in ad-hoc unconventional logical symbols, then please do. If you are incapable of writing without CAPITALIZING, italicizing, bolding and underscoring for lack of ability to express yourself in proper English, then please don't bother. I won't read your gibberish.Random —> unpredictable; however, unpredictable –/–> random — 180 Proof
If you're going to spout scientifically illiterate and innumerate "gibberish" like the above sentence, then you damn well can afford to learn something by deciphering my dumbed-down (for your benefit) abbreviated schema.Chaotic systemsdon't exist. — god must be atheist
Random —> unpredictable; however, unpredictable –/–> random (e.g. chaotic systems). — 180 Proof
Cidat — Cidat
Is everything random, or at least some things logical?
For example, I'd like to think that natural selection is not random. It was probably not random that one species would eventually evolve and dominate the animal kingdom, which is us humans. — Cidat
Even our idea of natural selection, however we describe it, is a human interpretation. Even when we support our ideas with scientific evidence, it is still us managing how to interpret the elements offered by science. We can’t avoid interpreting. Interpreting means that we cannot find anything objective, because whatever we consider is automatically filtered, adapted, changed, by our action of interpreting. The very ideas of logic and randomness are human interpretations. — Angelo Cannata
When we are able to predict the behaviour of an object, or an animal, this does not mean that the object, or the animal, is behaving according to our human extremely limited, I would even say stupid, logic. It is the opposite: we have built a logic that we adapted to what we observe in phenomenons, in order to gain some understanding and some mastering on those phenomenons. — Angelo Cannata
We can’t avoid interpreting. Interpreting means that we cannot find anything objective, because whatever we consider is automatically filtered, adapted, changed, by our action of interpreting. The very ideas of logic and randomness are human interpretations. — Angelo Cannata
Think about this: why should nature obey to the ridiculous logic, miserable mental frames, poor schemes, petty rational systems, created by humans? — Angelo Cannata
(1) Whatever cannot be predicted "by" (i.e. is intractably complex to) "humans" is, of course, unpredictable for humans (e.g. chaos theory, the P versus NP problem), yet are not 'random expressions or processes'.Random —> unpredictable; however, unpredictable –/–> random (e.g. chaotic systems).
— 180 Proof
please remember: Ithinkeverything is predictable, but not by humans; and things that humans call random are predictable too, but not by humans. — god must be atheist
"Random —> unpredictable" abbrevates sentence (2) above and "unpredictable –/–> random" abbreviates sentence (1). Both contradict your evidence-free "claim".How does your formula improve or contradict my claim?
there is an objectivity to be found — Possibility
Whatever objective you think you found is interpreted by you, so how can you say that it is objective? — Angelo Cannata
a rigorous philosophical way, means absolutely independent from anybody. So, if you instead make it relative by adding "for me", it becomes contradictory — Angelo Cannata
This is definitely true. So is goodness/infinite etc. There's nothing except a human abstraction which is randomness.Randomness is a human construct
It even says in the link that "In addition to exhibiting sensitive dependence, chaotic systems possess two other properties: they are deterministic and nonlinear (Smith 2007)."If you're going to spout scientifically illiterate and innumerate
When you say e.g. "helium is objective" you're communicating nothing anyone can use but if you say "helium is the second element on the periodic table" it becomes an actual proposition. — Shwah
If you consider objective reality dependent on the subject, then no. In this concept of objective reality there is no contradiction. — EugeneW
objective" , in a rigorous philosophical way, means absolutely independent from anybody. — Angelo Cannata
This is not what you find if you look for “objective” in any dictionary. — Angelo Cannata
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.