I would agree, Rog, that evolution has no 'purpose': it does certain things
based on physical and largely mechanical characteristics. The complexity of
all the stuff that exists, and the opportunity for an unimaginably large
number of interactions among elements of all that stuff - over hundreds of
millions of years - accounts for the patterns of life that we now dub
'sophisticated' and that some insist could only be created 'intelligently.'
(Of course, if one steps back and looks at it all, one could only conclude
that a truly intelligent creator would have done things VERY differently -
but that is another story.)
The thing that fascinates me, now, is that this purposeless evolution may be
changing, and that we humans are on the point of being able to introduce
purpose to the processes of evolution. I call this evolutionary management
and development, and am finishing up a book about it - so stand-by for a new
PoV to be thrown into the mix.
Best regards,
Lawry
ROG:
My intention was to criticize Pirsig for the large leap from his evidence
that there is a tendency or capability for evolution to lead to undefined
fitness and his supposedly proving that evolution has a purpose of leading
to
undefined fitness.
Does this make sense? Do you think that possibility implies purpose?
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 - 16:02:29 BST