Hi Erin,
Erin:
"I don't see how you have shown it is not a creative processs.
I am guessing it is from this Gould statement "Anyway, to counter the naive
view, Gould proposes that life started out being as simple as it could be, and
would have gotten more complex even if only random processes "designed" it. "
There can be different approaches to a creative process, one with
a specific design in mind and one in which a pattern emerges.
I believe you are distorting the definition of teleology to support your
point."
You are using different senses of "creative". The first is teleological
and the second isn't. Random mutations are creative in the sense that they
can create new recipes for genes, but this kind of creating is not purposeful.
Erin:
"Gould's claim that evolution could be due to random processes is as much of
a guess as Creationists claiming it is from a designer no?"
The evolutionists guess has the advantage of Occam's Razor. Natural selection
explains the outcome without introducing a mysterious designing force which
would then itself need explaining. It at least pushes off the God question to
the poor cosmologists. :)
Also, the evolutionists guess coincides better with evidence. Many genetic
mutations are not beneficial, and the organism suffers or dies. This does not
seem to fit what a designing force seeking "betterment" would do.
Glenn
__________________________________________________________________
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:25 BST