Previous in Forum: Old pipe insulation: is it amosite asbestos?   Next in Forum: Parker Solar Probe touches surface of the sun
Close
Close
Close
Page 2 of 6: « First < Prev 1 2 3 4 Next > Last »
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2004
Good Answers: 29

Is evolution correct?

12/15/2021 6:41 AM

We are lad to understand that the human as we know it, evolved from an ape like creature. From walking on all fours to upright and inventing, building, destroying and having wars.

If we have been around and inhabiting this planet side by side with other animals and apes, the question arises, why only has the human evolved to invent, destroy, build, wear clothes and kill and hunt for pleasure when all the other animals and apes have not evolved over the same time period to complete the same. Why have gorillas not build wooden houses for their families to live in or evolved to grow their own food crops. Why have they not created towns and villages to reside in. Why have only humans evolved to have many languages and have many beliefs of gods when animals have not done so over the same time period?

The only animal that kills for fun is humans, the only animal that creates wars is humans. And the only animals to over populate the planet is humans. All other animals only kill for necessity to survive.

Who stole the missing link? Are we all wrong in what has been taught to us and we now believe. Have we been lied to all along?

Why only have humans evolved far quicker than any other living animal on this planet if we originally were from ape like descendants?

Register to Reply
This discussion was "closed" on 02/17/2022 12:27 PM. No new comments are allowed.

Comments rated to be Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive ratings to make them "good answers".

Comments rated to be "almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, rate them!
Power-User

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NASA-Glenn Research Center, Cleveland Ohio
Posts: 389
Good Answers: 17
#282
In reply to #144
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/03/2022 2:49 PM

Do you have any idea just much matter the earth receives in one day?

100 TON per DAY

mostly vaporized and falls to earth as dust.... that is nothing to sneeze at.

Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Power-User

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 147
Good Answers: 9
#284
In reply to #282

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/03/2022 5:20 PM

Do you mean by "vaporized" an interaction with air to make molecules that are gaseous at stratospheric temps? What is the chemical nature of this matter? What is the "dust" and how does it relate to the topic of evolution?

Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#136
In reply to #134
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/21/2021 8:22 AM

As I said earlier, "a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices." Ironically, claiming the missing "i" bothers them but acting this way does not.

This reminds me of an Aristophanes quote;

Youth ages, immaturity is outgrown, ignorance can be educated, and drunkenness sobered, but stupidity lasts forever.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 44.56024"N 15.307971E
Posts: 6504
Good Answers: 249
#185
In reply to #136

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/28/2021 7:59 AM

To put it a little more succinctly,"You can't fix stupid."(in the comic strip"shoe")

__________________
"A man never stands so tall as when he stoops to help a child." "Never argue with a stupid person.They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"
Register to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NASA-Glenn Research Center, Cleveland Ohio
Posts: 389
Good Answers: 17
#291
In reply to #124
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/04/2022 8:35 AM

Except for the 100 Tons of matter that falls to earth every day, except for that.

Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#130
In reply to #121
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/20/2021 10:21 PM

If the multiverse is true...

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#129
In reply to #116
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/20/2021 10:18 PM

Now you claim to not know where babies come from.

You have proven to me that you know very little about Biology.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#126
In reply to #112
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/20/2021 10:14 PM

Ah yes, the infamous chicken or egg paradox, which came first? The egg came first. A bird that was very similar to a chicken laid it. Long before that bird existed lizards were laying eggs, too.

Complex organic molecules exist far and wide in this universe. There is no need for life to transform inorganic material into organic material.

You really should get over yourself. Just because you cannot figure something out doesn't mean nobody can figure things out, particularly when you insist on using a bad analogy.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#137
In reply to #112
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/21/2021 11:31 AM

The "first" organism comes from the joining of two non-organisms. One or both of those non-organisms would likely be considered a virus. I put "first" in quotes for it is unlikely this was a singular event. It is far more likely that many independent "firsts" happened long ago. The evolutionary competition had now begun.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#171
In reply to #112
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/26/2021 6:37 PM

'... Inorganic material has to become a life force prior to evolving...'

.

You have made statements to this effect repeatedly. It seems to be yet another example of arguing from a false premise. Why would life need to spring from inorganic material. There are abundant examples of evidence of organic molecules found off Earth, some in star forming gas clouds thousands of light years away. There is no reason to assume an absence or even a dearth of organic materials from which life may have sprung.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Associate

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 53
Good Answers: 1
#174
In reply to #171

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/27/2021 10:17 AM

How I am using the term inorganic: not having the structure or organization characteristic of living bodies.

At some point in time the process of evolution started, would you agree?

Molecules that previously did not have the structure or organization characteristic of living bodies by some unknown phenomena became a living structure, correct?

That first living structure would then have to develop into every other living structure here on earth for evolution to be correct.

Logically at some point there is a belief in some type of directional force (as many of you have eluded to in many posts) that has 'caused' humans (and all other living structures) to be in this form at this time in history.

Register to Reply
Guru
Technical Fields - Technical Writing - New Member Engineering Fields - Piping Design Engineering - New Member

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Richland, WA, USA
Posts: 20964
Good Answers: 780
#176
In reply to #174

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/27/2021 3:09 PM

Your first four paragraphs are substantially correct. The fifth is nonsense.

__________________
In vino veritas; in cervisia carmen; in aqua E. coli.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Power-User

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London NE, UK
Posts: 124
Good Answers: 10
#113
In reply to #111
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/20/2021 12:44 PM

There is no scientific evidence of evolution due to genes being 'added' - only scientific evidence of evolution occurring by mutation/change or lost.

I think that is the missing part of the evolution theory that bgot is referring to.

There doesn't appear to be a scientific answer to it and without an answer the theory of evolution remains only a theory with a big hole at it's beginning.

http://www.sciencecartoonsplus.com/images/home-page-miracle.gif

Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#138
In reply to #113

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/21/2021 11:42 AM

I see that you do not know of Down's syndrome or any other Trisomy disorders. Mutation by adding more genetic material does often lead to a malady but it need not lead to a malady. Just ask Mokgadi Caster Semenya if extra genes harmed her.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London NE, UK
Posts: 124
Good Answers: 10
#139
In reply to #138

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/21/2021 12:25 PM

Some misunderstanding here to do with genes vs chromosomes

https://pediaa.com/difference-between-chromosome-and-gene/

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/06/160615135534.htm

Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Placerville, CA (38° 45N, 120° 47'W)
Posts: 5989
Good Answers: 242
#140
In reply to #139

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/21/2021 2:12 PM

I fail to see why distinguishing between genes and chromosomes is relevant to this discussion. A change in a gene IS a change in the chromosome containing that gene.

From your second link: "Losing genes is also an evolution engine"

Any given change in genetic structure may or may not give the organism some kind of advantage or disadvantage compared to other similar organisms. Those changes that do give some kind of advantage are commonly perpetuated. That's Darwinism, as I understand it...

__________________
Teaching is a great experience, but there is no better teacher than experience.
Register to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London NE, UK
Posts: 124
Good Answers: 10
#143
In reply to #140

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/21/2021 3:10 PM

As with most difficult and complex problems - the devil is in the detail. You seem content to ignore/gloss over the details that don't suit your circular argument.

I'm going to bow out of this discussion as it's no longer producing any new insights - a closed mind does not want to get to the truth whereas an open mind is always curious to learn more.

Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#148
In reply to #143

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/21/2021 10:38 PM

And the kettle calls the pot black.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#123
In reply to #110
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/20/2021 10:03 PM

All Sciences are incomplete. Humanity does not know everything about any topic.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Associate

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 53
Good Answers: 1
#125
In reply to #123

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/20/2021 10:10 PM

This is very true.

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - CNC - New Member Hobbies - DIY Welding - New Member Engineering Fields - Electromechanical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 22646
Good Answers: 409
#156
In reply to #123

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/22/2021 4:25 PM

thats is a good answer, Science evolves and that applies to all, even yourself.

__________________
“ When people get what they want, they are often surprised when they get what they deserve " - James Wood
Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - CNC - New Member Hobbies - DIY Welding - New Member Engineering Fields - Electromechanical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 22646
Good Answers: 409
#105
In reply to #82
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/20/2021 8:07 AM

It’s better to call it a hypothesis, and if this thread direction persists for obstinately members then call it philosophical hypothesis. But this is only done for the terminally anal.

__________________
“ When people get what they want, they are often surprised when they get what they deserve " - James Wood
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
3
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#107
In reply to #105

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/20/2021 8:42 AM

No, it is not better to call evolution a hypothesis or even a philosophical hypothesis. Evolution is a scientific theory. (The link is to Merriam-Webster's online dictionary.) Words have specific meanings. Changing a word's meaning for the sake of an argument is lying. Most successful engineers are terminally anal in order to build things without confusion. CR4 is an engineering forum.

I also particularly like Merriam-Webster's explanation of the difference between a hypothesis and theory:

The Difference Between Hypothesis and Theory

A hypothesis is an assumption, an idea that is proposed for the sake of argument so that it can be tested to see if it might be true.

In the scientific method, the hypothesis is constructed before any applicable research has been done, apart from a basic background review. You ask a question, read up on what has been studied before, and then form a hypothesis.

A hypothesis is usually tentative; it's an assumption or suggestion made strictly for the objective of being tested.

A theory, in contrast, is a principle that has been formed as an attempt to explain things that have already been substantiated by data. It is used in the names of a number of principles accepted in the scientific community, such as the Big Bang Theory. Because of the rigors of experimentation and control, it is understood to be more likely to be true than a hypothesis is.

In non-scientific use, however, hypothesis and theory are often used interchangeably to mean simply an idea, speculation, or hunch, with theory being the more common choice.

Since this casual use does away with the distinctions upheld by the scientific community, hypothesis and theory are prone to being wrongly interpreted even when they are encountered in scientific contexts—or at least, contexts that allude to scientific study without making the critical distinction that scientists employ when weighing hypotheses and theories.

The most common occurrence is when theory is interpreted—and sometimes even gleefully seized upon—to mean something having less truth value than other scientific principles. (The word law applies to principles so firmly established that they are almost never questioned, such as the law of gravity.)

This mistake is one of projection: since we use theory in general to mean something lightly speculated, then it's implied that scientists must be talking about the same level of uncertainty when they use theory to refer to their well-tested and reasoned principles.

The distinction has come to the forefront particularly on occasions when the content of science curricula in schools has been challenged—notably, when a school board in Georgia put stickers on textbooks stating that evolution was "a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things." As Kenneth R. Miller, a cell biologist at Brown University, has said, a theory "doesn’t mean a hunch or a guess. A theory is a system of explanations that ties together a whole bunch of facts. It not only explains those facts, but predicts what you ought to find from other observations and experiments.”

While theories are never completely infallible, they form the basis of scientific reasoning because, as Miller said "to the best of our ability, we’ve tested them, and they’ve held up."

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 3)
Guru
Hobbies - CNC - New Member Hobbies - DIY Welding - New Member Engineering Fields - Electromechanical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 22646
Good Answers: 409
#155
In reply to #107

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/22/2021 4:16 PM

You missed the point, entirely,… this is a discussion. Like a brainstorming session, which I’m sure you’ve experience.

and you reenforced my point with the comment referring to with you using it casually with the definition of hypotheses and theory being used interchangeably. Is it scientific, no, it’s casual, because of the backlash of the status quo. In this case, you et al.

in a discussion, people will present off the wall ideas that don’t make a lot of sense, but in the discussion you let them explain, and then challenge the explanation.

the results more times than not when it’s discussed, the off the wall comments that appears ridicules and can be ridicules stumbles unto some this usefully even true.
These casual statements ends up turning out to be true,… and there plenty of examples in history within the scientific community to show this to be true.

But you’ll never find them in the Merriiam-Webster. And that’s where people outside of academia can turn out to be correct, even though it goes against the status quo with ridicule.

instead what you do, you take your book out over analyze it and try your best to shut it down with this trust the science BS.

When in fact this trust the science bs you infer to is the most anti-science statement there is.

Questioning the science is how you do science.

If you look at history, science evolves.
Alfred Wagener an example, he also was ridiculed by academia et al
which reenforces my point of what your doing. So be careful with how you define science.

as far as using your opponent is lying as a defense, is someone who is hyper-sensitive to being offended and shows it’s weakness.

__________________
“ When people get what they want, they are often surprised when they get what they deserve " - James Wood
Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 4)
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hemel Hempstead, UK
Posts: 5282
Good Answers: 287
#93
In reply to #77
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/18/2021 7:12 AM

"Doesn't the term 'valuable to mankind' require some type of outside rater?"

You mean some type of outside rater like evolution.

You also need to familiarise yourself with the ideas in "The Selfish gene".

__________________
We are alone in the universe, or, we are not. Either way it's incredible... Adapted from R. Buckminster Fuller/Arthur C. Clarke
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#83
In reply to #76
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/17/2021 5:08 PM

But it must be acknowledged that not all human specimens contribute to Darwinian progression. In the wild, runts of the litters have a poor chance of survival, which, in Darwinian terms, is as it should be. Our moral code protects the strong as well as the weak, and is therefore not Darwinian. The future of this code is uncertain. We are at a point now where we could start to manage our own evolution. For many, this is a frightening prospect, other's eagerly anticipate it. An old friend, who held many iconoclastic views, said, "All you have to do is walk downtown and look at the people, and you have to agree that the sooner we start a program of genetic engineering, the better." (I'm just reporting what he said. I'm not saying I share his view.)

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2004
Good Answers: 29
#79
In reply to #74
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/17/2021 4:06 PM

I would not say humans have moved away from tribalism in any way. The UK has tribes that follow a team who fight over possession of a ball, Football. Cricket, Rugby.

USA: football, baseball and American football. Australia: rugby, cricket. India: cricket.

There is no moral code in the tribalism that follows these sports whatsoever. So humans may have evolved i some areas, but they are firmly routed in the basics of belonging to a tribe and a village where they have commonality and a sense of belonging associated to a tribe.

The African continent has not moved past tribalism and neither has America or Europe. People have a need to belong to a tribe whether it be British, German, Italian, French, Canadian. So why has this part of humans not evolved?

Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#85
In reply to #79

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/17/2021 5:26 PM

That part of humans has evolved. We can belong to a "tribe" of fellow football enthusiasts, but still have a sense of belonging to a larger city community. On top of that we can have a sense of belonging to a nation, and on top of that we can have a sense of being a citizen of the world. To stone-age people, the concepts of belonging to a city, a nation, the world, would be incomprehensible.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2004
Good Answers: 29
#90
In reply to #85

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/18/2021 6:24 AM

Not so. Stone age man did belong to a tribe and village. There is much evidence of this so cannot be incomprehensible to them. So some where even at this stage evolution must have been present and taking place.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hemel Hempstead, UK
Posts: 5282
Good Answers: 287
#91
In reply to #74
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/18/2021 6:38 AM

"If it were Darwinian, it would protect only you."

You need to familiarise yourself with the ideas of Richard Dawkin's "The Selfish Gene".

****************************************************************

Off topic segue: the place where that comes from FourMinuteBooks: looks like a great resource.

****************************************************************

__________________
We are alone in the universe, or, we are not. Either way it's incredible... Adapted from R. Buckminster Fuller/Arthur C. Clarke
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#96
In reply to #91

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/18/2021 4:28 PM

So, you are also of the view that our moral code, a code that protects the weak and the strong, the intelligent and the stupid, the sick and the healthy, the agile and the lame, the well-formed and the deformed - allows any and all to reproduce and pass on strengths and defects alike - is Darwinian?

Elsewhere you point out how similar humans are to the beasts, so presumably, the methods of improving breeds of animals -cattle, horses, dogs - would produce equally salutary results in humans. Our moral code bars this possibility. In the name of freedom and personal autonomy it permits coupling and gene propagation that would make a cattle breeder blanch.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#97
In reply to #96

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/18/2021 4:54 PM

That does not sound like anything Richard Dawkins would publish, particularly in "The Selfish Gene." What chapter is that idea or are you setting up a Strawman for attack?

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
2
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hemel Hempstead, UK
Posts: 5282
Good Answers: 287
#100
In reply to #96

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/19/2021 5:28 AM

"So, you are also of the view that our moral code, a code that protects the weak and the strong, the intelligent and the stupid, the sick and the healthy, the agile and the lame, the well-formed and the deformed - allows any and all to reproduce and pass on strengths and defects alike - is Darwinian?"

Yes: that's exactly what I believe "the selfish gene" says.

__________________
We are alone in the universe, or, we are not. Either way it's incredible... Adapted from R. Buckminster Fuller/Arthur C. Clarke
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#101
In reply to #100

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/19/2021 5:31 AM

I stand corrected.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#102
In reply to #100

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/19/2021 11:01 AM

I haven't read Dawkin's book (maybe I will), but if your interpretation of his thesis is correct, cattle breeders should take note. They should not winnow out the weak, the sickly, the deformed as they have been doing (and as occurs in the wild, for example, in deer herds via wolf predation), but should protect and nourish all, and exercise complete non-interference in herd reproduction. According to your understanding of "The Selfish Gene", this would be the best means to facilitate herd improvement. By extension, and similarly, our societal model of protecting the right of reproduction of all citizens, whether formed or deformed mentally and physically, is also the best evolution strategy.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Edinburgh, Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 1282
Good Answers: 22
#103
In reply to #102

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/19/2021 12:54 PM

All cattle breeders think about is increasing yields.

This only takes higher muscle and reasonable health into account.

With certain species of dogs there are inherent flaws introduced by too small a gene pool, and this has been noted by some farmers who will keep a few 'rare breeds' available for cross breeding to avoid such issues.

Humans, and other animals with social structures - bees, ants,?? - feed and train infants for specific roles in that society.

A great amount of muscle is not needed to be a member of the ruling class, so that is only looked for in the (manual labour) working class.

Where humans have a specific range of requirements due to location, available food, exposure to solar radiation and so on, we see differences occurring: colour, size,...

Even birth rates change with higher rates where the infant mortality is higher (India), and lower rates where people live longer (Japan).

But for these alone to show change to a different species, the limited diet of a specific zone would have to be the only food provided for centuries.

__________________
Madness is all in the mind
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#104
In reply to #103

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/19/2021 1:37 PM

I expected my cattle breeding example, and the point I was making, to be more broadly interpreted. Selective animal breeding can take more than muscle and health into account. In dog breeding it is not about conformation alone. Temperament and intelligence are also targeted outcomes. Those breeding goals are achieved by deliberately selecting those that exhibit the desired qualities, not by a breeding free-for-all, as Randall has submitted.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 44.56024"N 15.307971E
Posts: 6504
Good Answers: 249
#169
In reply to #96

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/23/2021 8:17 AM

In a hundred years or so,there will be no separate races of mankind.

All will be merged into a homogenized species,with a very large gene pool,which will make the species stronger.

I have seen some very "ugly"(by today's standard of beauty*) parents with some very beautiful children,and conversely.

You never know what the recessive genes may bring to the table.

*The definition of beauty changes over time,like language.

__________________
"A man never stands so tall as when he stoops to help a child." "Never argue with a stupid person.They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"
Register to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: 3rd rock from the sun,a small dust mote,in a small insignificant spiral galaxy referred to locally as the Milky Way
Posts: 143
Good Answers: 3
#498
In reply to #96

Re: Is evolution correct?

02/08/2022 8:41 AM

Exactly what do you mean by "self aware"?Was Helen Keller self aware?She could not recognize herself in a mirror,used sign language at first,then learned to speak using only vibrations from her teacher's throat?

We learn everything from others.We are born a blank slate.We learn to walk,talk,run,swim,and all other skills that we have from others.

We plagiarize everyone from our first word, and every word thereafter.

So who are you,who sits in judgement of others,who cannot see your true self when you look into the mirror of self reflection?

You have exposed your true self to others,but you are too blind to see.

I am not judging you, for you are heir to your genetics and life experiences,and cannot really help the person you have become.

You could not choose the creature you became,nor can anyone else.,but for a simple twist of DNA, you could have become a tree,or a worm,or a hairy ape,instead of a naked one.

I am not qualified to judge you,or any of God's creatures,for I have not walked in their shoes.

Every creature has a reason and purpose,even flies and mosquitoes.

You too have a purpose,if only to make others see themselves in the mirror.

I wish you happiness ,joy and success in your life.

May you live long,learn,evolve,and prosper.

HTRN2

__________________
There is no darkness except for ignorance..Shakespeare
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#57
In reply to #50
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/17/2021 6:15 AM

How do you know what a duck thinks or what morals they hold? We've yet to break down the human to avian translation barrier.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 44.56024"N 15.307971E
Posts: 6504
Good Answers: 249
#62
In reply to #50
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/17/2021 8:43 AM

I have seen dogs aware of their impending death.They will go away into the woods and find a quite spot to die,away from their home.

I have seen it many times with very old hunting dogs,and have encountered them when hunting.Anyone who has had a very old dog,and lives in the country has probably seen this.

Of course,some will say this is not so,and I will never argue with them,it is foolish to do so.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

The main reason some cannot accept the fact that animals can have emotions is due to ego,thinking that we are unique.

I have seen videos of elephants painting pictures,birds and chimps creating tools,birds with knowledge of displacement,etc.

Chimps mourning the loss of a friend,elephants grieving over a lost one.

__________________
"A man never stands so tall as when he stoops to help a child." "Never argue with a stupid person.They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#66
In reply to #62

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/17/2021 11:14 AM

I fully accept that animals have emotions. I do not accept that they have a knowledge of good and evil, and that they judge the rightness of their own behaviour by a moral code. They act according to their nature, and therefore can never be characterized as good or bad. A grizzly that kills a hiker is not a bad bear, but a man who kills a hiker most certainly is a bad man. Why so? Is it not natural to kill another hiker on the trail? Maybe the man wanted to be alone in the woods and the hiker disturbed him and this made him angry. In addition, he could tell from the hiker's clothes that the hiker belonged to another social group. Of course it was a natural response to kill the hiker. But unlike animals, we are self-aware. We know that there is still a beast within us, but our concept of what is right and wrong is not measured by the standard of our beast nature. Via our self-awareness and our moral code we transcend brute nature.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 44.56024"N 15.307971E
Posts: 6504
Good Answers: 249
#154
In reply to #66

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/22/2021 2:58 PM

We are taught good from evil,and a dog can be taught good behavior from bad behavior.

A dog that tears up the yard digging for moles knows he has done wrong,and will hide when his master comes home.He knows he has done wrong.

I have seen my dog with an unmistakable guilty look on his face.

Koko the gorilla would tell a lie when necessary to prevent a scolding.

An orangutan was picking locks and letting all of the other primates out of their cages,then sitting back and watching the excitlemet of the handlers putting them all back in their cages.

They searched his cage looking for what he used to pick the lock,and could not find it.They finally confronted him,and asked him for it.He curled out his lower lip,and there it was..a pop top hidden between his lip and gum,and he had a guilty look on his face.How he picked the locks with a pop top is unknown.

Same with people.Right from wrong is learned,I don't think it is intrinsic.

__________________
"A man never stands so tall as when he stoops to help a child." "Never argue with a stupid person.They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#170
In reply to #154

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/23/2021 10:29 AM

But what do you mean when you say that the knowledge of right and wrong is learned? Do you mean that it is like learning the right and wrong side of the road to drive on, depending on what country you are in? Or do you mean it is like learning the law of gravity? In the former, right and wrong are arbitrary. In the latter, right and wrong are fundamentals, unalterable.

You readily accept, when in another country, to drive on the side of the road that is deemed 'right'. But suppose you gave shelter for the night to a man in need, and in the morning he stole your car? Would you accept his telephoned explanation that where he grew up they were taught that stealing from those who are kind to you is not wrong, but right? You would answer angrily that you didn't care what he was taught, what he did was wrong, and he better return the car now, or you are calling the cops. Your feeling would be that he had violated a fundamental principle of human behaviour, regardless of what he claimed to have been taught.

Some will argue that this fundamental principle of human behaviour, this moral law to which I am referring, is simply a herd preservation instinct, a product of evolution. C.S. Lewis, the well-known Christian apologist counters with this illustration: "In response to a cry from help from a man in danger you will feel two desires - one a desire to give help (due to your herd instinct), the other a desire to keep out of danger (due to the instinct of self-preservation). But in addition to these two impulses will be a third thing which tells you that you ought to follow the impulse to help, and suppress the impulse to run away. This thing that judges between two instincts, that decides which should be encouraged, cannot itself be either of them."

Such thinking about moral law, was surely, long ago, the beginning of a theological explanation for our knowledge of good and evil. If it is not something we learn, then how did we come to know it? Quoting C.S. Lewis again, "Everyone on earth has this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and really cannot get rid of it."

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#63
In reply to #27
Find in discussion

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/17/2021 9:21 AM

'... You could easily train a large dog to attack anyone in a wheelchair, ..'

Human children can and have been trained as child soldiers to attack based on criteria just as arbitrary as someone being wheelchair bound. It would not be unexpected for such a child soldier to rejoice and take pride in accomplishing what they have been thoroughly trained to do.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#75
In reply to #63

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/17/2021 1:31 PM

Your point being that since dogs and humans can both be trained to kill, then we are no different than dogs? However vicious a dog's behaviour, the dog's owner/trainer, not the dog, is legally responsible. If a person is trained to kill, it is that person who ultimately pulls the trigger, or wields the knife, and they, not the teacher, must accept legal responsibility for their action.

I don't understand the relentless arguing by posters in this thread that humans do not by any measure transcend brute nature, that we are no different than the beasts. Art, architecture, music, poetry, literature... Never heard of them. Let's all deny the fine, the noble, the beautiful, and embrace the coarse and the ugly. Let us all dismiss the spiritual (can't be measured or weighed) and wallow with the pigs in the mud.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2004
Good Answers: 29
#78
In reply to #75

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/17/2021 3:46 PM

Agreed that the owner is responsible, but the dog pays the price for the owners thoughtlessness. So the perpetrator of the act pays the dues, not the owner. And yes, we are no different when humans have been trained by other to do acts violence.

Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hemel Hempstead, UK
Posts: 5282
Good Answers: 287
#92
In reply to #75

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/18/2021 7:04 AM

"I don't understand the relentless arguing by posters in this thread that humans do not by any measure transcend brute nature"

I don't think anyone said or believes that. What I think most of us believe is that

"humans do not by any measure transcend brute nature"

I celebrate our appreciation of art and achievements in engineering, science and all fields of human activity, but, the only difference between us and other creatures is a small change to certain specific parts of the brain. Many other creatures have much larger changes to various parts of their bodies including their brains.

__________________
We are alone in the universe, or, we are not. Either way it's incredible... Adapted from R. Buckminster Fuller/Arthur C. Clarke
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#94
In reply to #92

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/18/2021 11:06 AM

"...the only difference between us and other creatures is a small change to certain specific parts of the brain."

...and it remains a mystery how those small differences resulted in human self-awareness/consciousness. When, and for what evolutionary purpose did we come to know that we know? Analogously, for computers to become self-aware do we just need to add a few more transistors and tweak the circuitry a bit?

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#172
In reply to #75

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/26/2021 6:42 PM
__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#173
In reply to #172

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/27/2021 9:51 AM

In your linked article, it is reported that the Eurasian Magpie and the Cleaner Wrasse (a type of fish) pass the Mirror Self Recognition Test. Shall we conclude from this that a magpie and a fish possess a self-awareness no different than human self-awareness, and that the magpie and the wrasse are capable of self-reflection (in their mind, not in a mirror), and understand the concept of I and thou? If that is our conclusion, then magpies and fish should be held legally responsible for their actions, and (it hardly needs saying) if they run afoul of the law, have the right to a fair and speedy trial.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#175
In reply to #173

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/27/2021 1:01 PM

Addendum to my post #173: Could a computer/robot painted with polka dots be programmed to print "That's me!" when it is placed in front of a mirror, and print "That's not me." when an image of a non polka dot computer/robot is presented to it? Probably yes. So could we conclude that the computer/robot possesses the self-awareness of a human? Clearly not. We know that we know. That is the preeminent human self-awareness attribute. As I have stated elsewhere, the evolutionary advantage of knowing that we know, is unclear.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
4
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#268
In reply to #175

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/02/2022 11:28 PM

"... Could a computer/robot painted with polka dots be programmed to print "That's me!" when it is placed in front of a mirror, and print "That's not me." when an image of a non polka dot computer/robot is presented to it?..."

Your polkadot robot scenario is not analogous to passing the mirror test:

The animals have not been trained to give indication that (you seem to think) would pass the test. Your robot has.

The animals behave in a way which demonstrates a functional understanding of self. Your robot had been trained to signal directly to the test observer in a language the observer is expected to understand without demonstrating any understanding on the part of the robot itself.

.

Take another look at the mirror test. This is not a behavior which the test animals have been specifically trained to perform. This is not some parlor trick where the animals are conditioned to elicit a response that is intended to signal meaning for the human observer yet demonstrates no particular understanding is the test subject.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 4)
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#269
In reply to #268

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/03/2022 9:02 AM

GA

But as I said way back in comment #2 in reply to Randal's GA comment, #1. No amount of data or references can change the minds of some people. I'll now add that they will often add all sorts of misleading noise as they resist change.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#271
In reply to #269

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/03/2022 10:10 AM

See my post #270 in reply to post #268.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#272
In reply to #271

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/03/2022 10:17 AM

Yeah, but demonstrating your refusal to even consider a change in your mind by adding two noisy replies does not rebut my comment. It reinforces my comment.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#273
In reply to #272

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/03/2022 11:18 AM

Researchers in this field have interpreted the results of the Mirror Test differently. In post #268, Truth is not a Compromise presents the interpretation that supports his (and your) position. In post #270 I present the interpretation (sourced from his link) that supports my position. Unlike you, I do not dismiss the interpretation that supports your position as irrelevant "noise". It is intellectually dishonest of both you and TINAC not to acknowledge that researcher's are not in agreement as to how to interpret the test results. Why should I be expected to choose among the published conflicting interpretations to bring my position into alignment with yours?

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#270
In reply to #268

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/03/2022 10:07 AM

That is a good refutation of my computer/robot analogy. As you suggested, I looked again at the Mirror Test, and I once again noticed that the cleaner wrasse, a small fish, passed the test. So a type of fish is in the graduating class with great apes. Hmm... It seems to indicate this is a very low bar test of a sense of self. Could there be another interpretation of the results?

From the link you provided in an earlier post: "A number of authors have suggested alternative explanations." One suggestion was that "the animal may see the reflection as some odd entity that it is able to control through its own movements." This fits with my programmed computer/robot analogy. The animal has evolutionary neurological programming compelling it to bond with other animals with a certain conformation and markings (its own species). Presented in the mirror with an odd entity meeting the conformation criterion but not the markings criterion, the animal responds by directing/controlling the odd entity in the mirror to touch the unusual mark, and the odd entity in the mirror does so.

Whatever the interpretation of passing the Mirror Test, any cognitive function that could reasonably be associated with the displayed behaviour is a long long way from that associated with human consciousness - among them, the ability to think about thinking. Can we conclude that the cleaner wrasse, because it passed the Mirror Test, says to itself, in its more philosophical moments (in fish language of course), "I think, therefore I am." ?

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
2
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#300
In reply to #270

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/04/2022 2:03 PM

".... I looked again at the Mirror Test, and I once again noticed that the cleaner wrasse, a small fish, passed the test. So a type of fish is in the graduating class with great apes. Hmm... It seems to indicate this is a very low bar test of a sense of self ...."

.

That the main thrust of what you present as a refutation (of the report that in passing the mirror test a wrasse has been documented exhibiting behavior strongly indicative of a sense of self) boils down to an exclamation that is a little fish, speaks volumes about your overwhelming bias against the idea of animals different from humans possessing what you apparently deem human only abilities.

Your attempts to muddy the waters with claims that the validity of the tests is questioned by some appears desperate. A hoard of fervent dissenters can be found in opposition of even the most certain of fact. There are flat-Earthers, Moon landing deniers, brethatarians, and gaggles of folks who regularly send pleadings and apologies upon bent knee to invisible floaty voyeurs (with variable attributes depending largely on geography and familial associations) in the sky. It would be surprising if any solid research did not have detractors. The real question is can you yourself present a decent cogent plausible probable refutation of the conclusions. That I have not yet seen.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#301
In reply to #300

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/04/2022 5:04 PM

When a fish is in the graduating class with apes, one could continue to trust that the test is measuring something meaningful, or you could reconsider the test's validity. Reasonably, some have chosen the latter. In your link to the Mirror Test it is stated that there have been alternative interpretations of the test. One author, Povinelli, was referenced from the Oxford University Press - not a place you will find the writings of flat-Earthers and their ilk. My post #270 describes his interpretation. Note that all writings about the meaning of the Mirror Test are referred to as interpretations, not conclusions. You are taking the interpretation that supports your position and treating it as fact, and dismissing all others as the raving of crackpots. I have calmly considered the conflicting interpretations, without snorts and name-calling, and decided that the Mirror Test, whatever it is measuring, is not what you vociferously claim it is measuring. If there were a desperation prize, you would win it.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply Score 2 for Off Topic
2
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#303
In reply to #301

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/06/2022 1:53 AM

"... When a fish is in the graduating class with apes, one could continue to trust that the test is measuring something meaningful, or you could reconsider the test's validity ..."

.

You are only doubling down on your own bias. You have not offered a critique of the theory behind the test, nor of the test's methodology. This response does not rise to the level of a rebuttal as there is nothing but a reitteration of your disbelief... 'but it can't have a sense of self, it is only a fish!'

Insisting on the infallibility of your own disbelief is insufficient. That insufficiency is not alleviated merely stating that in addition to your own disbelief, someone mentioned in the Oxford University Press has suggested an alternative interpretation of the test. What is that interpretation? Do you understand it/believe it is more likely? Does it align with your own argument ('it is only a fish')?

You might want to proceed with caution if you are concerned that people might begin to believe fish cognition might rival humans in some area. The quality of your argument might suggest the bar is not that high for fish.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#304
In reply to #303

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/06/2022 12:29 PM

"When a fish is in the graduating class with apes, one could continue to trust that the test is measuring something meaningful, or you could reconsider the test's validity .." (my quote) You characterize my scepticism that the test is a positive indication of self-awareness given that both a fish and an ape have passed the test as a "doubling down on your own bias". Many would share my scepticism. From the Journal of Social Issues (1993), "Attribution of Cognitive States to Animals". T.J.Eddy et al. - "The results showed that in all cases the perceived similarity and inferred cognitive ability of animals" placed fish second from the bottom - above invertebrates and below amphibians.

You continue to accept the Mirror Test and the interpretation that it is an indication of self-awareness in animals (the interpretation that supports your position), as fact. The matter is far from settled. In the scientific community there is no consensus as to the meaning of the Mirror Test results. I acknowledge this. You don't. Is it reasonable to call my position biased, or yours?

Researcher D.J.Povinelli has suggested other interpretations. One is that the animal touching the mark on its face may merely be trying to ascertain whether it has a mark on its face which corresponds to the mark on the face of the unfamiliar animal it sees in the mirror. (Journal of Comparative Psychology, "Self-Recognition in Chimpanzees", 1993). He writes that another possible interpretation (to which I already referred in post #270) is that the animal may see the reflection as some odd entity that it is able to control through its own movements. Gorillas and monkeys often act aggressively to the image in the mirror, indicating they are unable to comprehend the image as being of themselves. This supports Povinelli's interpretation, that even when the response is non-aggressive, the animal could still be seeing the image in the mirror as another creature, not itself.

In other studies, monkeys and gorillas were given hundreds of hours of mirror exposure and "no evidence of self-recognition was found using the marking paradigm". (American Journal of Primatology, "Failure to Demonstrate Self-Recognition in Gorillas", 1982, D.H.Ledbetter; International Journal of Primatology, "Monkeys with Mirrors", 1984, J.R.Anderson; Developmental Psychobiology, "Absence of Self-Recognition in Monkeys" 1977, C.G.Gallup). Again, what reasonable interpretation can be made of the results of the test, given that a fish passed the test, and monkeys and gorillas failed?

In the September 2002 issue of Nature, Mark Bekoff writes in the article "Animal Reflections" that "it remains debatable whether recognition of one's mirror image implies self-awareness". He cautions against "imbuing animals with unknown cognitive capacities" and suggests the I-ness or I-self of humans could be in cognitively distinct category from a sense of body-ness.

You wrote two words, "Mirror Test" in an earlier post, as if the meaning of the test is scientifically settled, so no further discussion is necessary. Your unspoken assertion in that post, and your later vocalization of your position that the Mirror Test indisputably answers 'yes' to the question, 'Are some animals other than humans self-aware?', is not in accord with the literature.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#306
In reply to #304

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/06/2022 5:29 PM

Have you still not read the case for the cleaner wrasse? Why speculate?

Yes, the gorillas did not pass the mirror test likely for some of the reasons you mention. Gorillas are aggressive toward new conspecifics. Dominant males will rush those that maintain eye contact. The submissive members avert eye contact. If the animal avoids looking in the mirror or takes something looking at it from the mirror as a challenge to fight, it is unlikely to pass the test. This does not mean that gorillas do not have a sense of self, it means they do not pass the mirror test.

The behavior in the wrasse is not just some subtle gesture made in the mirror as you have speculated. In fact when marks were made on cleaner wrasse fish, after noticing the marks in the mirror, wrasse were observed to move to a place to rub the marked body part against structures in their containment then return to the mirror (presumably) to check the spot. The action (presumably to abrase the spot) continued until the spot was gone. When a spot was applied without pigment no such action occurred....so it wasn't the feeling of a painted spot.

Can you understand how this differs from a polkadotted robot being programmed to display 'this is me' upon sensing polkadots in a mirror?

Hey, just as a point of interest, did you know that a cleaner wrasse is among the set of animals observed using tools? Know what isn't in that set?...polkadot robots.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#310
In reply to #306

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/06/2022 6:50 PM

I have already acknowledged that you made a good rebuttal of my polka-dot computer analogy in an earlier post, so it is petty of you to continue to return to it.

I referenced a couple of studies that showed that gorillas and certain monkeys do not pass the mirror test, even after hundreds of hours of mirror exposure. Until now, you have declared that passing the mirror test positively proves self-awareness. Now you declare that failing the mirror test doesn't disprove self-awareness. By that measure, even a worm's failure to pass the mirror test does not mean the worm is not self-aware. Is this reasonable, or is it a manifestation of what you repeatedly accuse me - your personal bias?

I made a number of references in my last post to a few published papers regarding the Mirror Test and interpretations of it. There are many,many papers on the subject, and as yet there is no scientific consensus on the meaning of the results of the test. It is an ongoing debate whether a pass can be interpreted as a sense of I-ness. It is intellectually dishonest of you to continue to pretend that there is a consensus.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hemel Hempstead, UK
Posts: 5282
Good Answers: 287
#314
In reply to #310

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/07/2022 6:13 AM

"Now you declare that failing the mirror test doesn't disprove self-awareness. By that measure, even a worm's failure to pass the mirror test does not mean the worm is not self-aware."

Because A implies B it does not follow that "not A" implies "not B".

__________________
We are alone in the universe, or, we are not. Either way it's incredible... Adapted from R. Buckminster Fuller/Arthur C. Clarke
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#321
In reply to #314

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/07/2022 11:18 AM

Sure, sure, I know the logic. With respect to the Mirror Test, TINAC claims (in post #315) that passing the Mirror Test "provides strong evidence for a sense of self". (there is no scientific consensus on this, but that aside for now) and states in his post #306 that not passing the test just means the animal didn't pass the test. It doesn't mean the animal doesn't have a sense of self.

Maybe so, but how are we to interpret studies in which monkeys and gorillas were given hundreds of hours of mirror exposure and "no evidence of self-recognition was found using the marking paradigm."? (my post #304). Every day for weeks (weeks!) these animals saw themselves in a mirror and never exhibited any behaviour that could be interpreted as self-recognition. This cannot be set aside, with a shrug, as a meaningless result.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hemel Hempstead, UK
Posts: 5282
Good Answers: 287
#322
In reply to #321

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/07/2022 11:42 AM

"This cannot be set aside, with a shrug, as a meaningless result."

I don't think that anyone believes it is a meaningless result.

Do not take the next comment as an insult: it is simply an observation.

As you continue to demonstrate: even different intelligent humans think in ways which are completely different from the ways other humans think. It is impossible for us to conceive of different ways other creatures might think. Failing the mirror test could be a clue which might in the future help us to understand some of those differences.

What perplexes me a bit about this is, if you do not believe that we are apes with some small parts of our brains developed more than other apes, what do you believe?

__________________
We are alone in the universe, or, we are not. Either way it's incredible... Adapted from R. Buckminster Fuller/Arthur C. Clarke
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#326
In reply to #322

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/07/2022 1:55 PM

"What perplexes me a bit about this is, if you do not believe that we are apes with some small parts of our brains developed more than other apes, what do you believe?"

I believe there is a deep mystery that many in this forum refuse to acknowledge. They pretend to understand far more than they do. I believe Shakespeare was right, "There is more in heaven and earth, Horatio, than is dreamt of in your philosophy." I believe that the author referenced by dkwarner in post #312 is also, in his pontificating about the origins and evolution of consciousness, a pretender. As D. J. Povinelli writes, "The profound biological continuity between human and non-humans masks an equally profound discontinuity between human and non-human minds." I know that according to evolutionary theory there cannot be a discontinuity. But the difference is so great that it is a struggle to conceive of it as just a difference of degree. I'm not suggesting miraculous intervention. But I am open to the possibility of a non-Darwinian explanation. What do I mean by that? Maybe Darwin is to the biological as Newton was to the cosmological. Newton answered a lot of questions, but not all of them. What came after Newton was unimaginable to anyone two hundred years ago. Maybe what comes after Darwin will be just as unimaginable to us.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hemel Hempstead, UK
Posts: 5282
Good Answers: 287
#334
In reply to #326

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/08/2022 7:13 AM

Good Answer.

I just don't think that the change, in the analytical and other "thinking" parts of our brains, is unique. There was almost certainly a critical point which once passed led to greater changes, in exactly the same way as other much more extraordinary changes occurred in other creatures. For example

Elephants trunks; giraffes necks; narwhals incisors; marine creatures and bats echo location; electric eels ability; many sea creatures and fireflies ability to make light; spiders ability to make a material stronger than steel and to utilise it in many different ways; dogs and many other creatures olfactory abilities, and many many more.

As soon as you start to explain how all these changes were driven, you will see that those same arguments can easily be applied to our own development.

__________________
We are alone in the universe, or, we are not. Either way it's incredible... Adapted from R. Buckminster Fuller/Arthur C. Clarke
Register to Reply
2
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#323
In reply to #321

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/07/2022 11:46 AM

You are relying on the exact same faulty logic. A null result from one sample set does not mandate a null result from all or any other sample sets. Why a null result occurred could be due to a true null result for all, the test being invalid for that sample set, the sample set being too small for statistical analysis, or a variety of other possible obscuring variables were not accounted for. Identifying which scenario is accurate can only be determined by a discussion among skilled individuals willing to accept a positive test is possible and devising a new test to perform.

Clearly, you are not one willing to accept a positive result.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#342
In reply to #323

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/08/2022 11:10 AM

Well, a positive or negative result depends on how the question is framed, isn't it?

Here is a question: Will animals that display no behaviour evidencing self-recognition when exposed to a mirror for a brief time, continue to display no behaviour evidencing self-recognition when exposed to a mirror for hundreds of hours?

In peer reviewed papers, with monkeys and gorillas, the answer is yes.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#343
In reply to #342

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/08/2022 1:19 PM

If I only had a brain ��

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#345
In reply to #343

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/08/2022 6:03 PM

That is a strawman argument.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 6)
3
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#315
In reply to #310

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/07/2022 7:30 AM

"....Until now, you have declared that passing the mirror test positively proves self-awareness..."

.

You have deficiency in reading comprehension. I never said self-awareness (nor anything else remotely related) was positively proven by the mirror test. You owe a retraction and an apology.

The claims I have made about the mirror test roughly say that passing it provides strong evidence for a sense of self.

.

"... Now you declare that failing the mirror test doesn't disprove self-awareness...."

.

Yes that is correct. The passing the mirror test is strong indication of a sense of self, while not passing the mirror test is not indication of a lack of self-awareness. (Your resistance to something this basic betrays your utter unfamiliarity with experiment design and empiricism at a fundamental level.)

Pop quiz:

1. Are most blind people self-aware?

2. Would many blind people pass the mirror test?

3. If you answered 'yes' to 1 and 'no' to 2, can you understand how failing to pass the mirror test does not indicate a lack of self awareness?

.

"... It is intellectually dishonest of you to continue to pretend that there is a consensus. ...."

.

Once again you attempt to assign a position to me that I have not stated nor do I hold. This strawman defamation is a petty ploy to bring this absurd 'scientific consensus' argument to the forefront.

What subjects do you think rise to the level of scientific consensus? Anything with ongoing research? Anything with research performed in the last 50 years? Please elucidate me with a few examples of those topics for which the science is settles and there are no detractors, especially anything within the last few generations.

This attempt to sideline anything without a so called 'scientific comcensus' is used by those who don't want to sound anti-science, but also don't want to consider anything science uncovers.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 3)
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#311
In reply to #306

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/06/2022 11:21 PM

He can read but he clearly cannot comprehend anything that disagrees with preconceptions. He'll reserve the right to change the meanings of words to suit his own perspective and reject anyone's right to define those words to anything that conflicts with that perspective.

He's a pious, benevolent tyrant protecting humanity from barbarity and torment. Next, he will change all of the high school literature to reflect his most pious view and ban all psychological study funding, particularly any psychology using nonhuman subjects as irrelevant and any use of human subjects as cruel and unusual treatment outside of employment.

{Sorry, but I really am getting tired of this. I'm all for real, even long-winded discussions where all sides attempt to comprehend others' views as possible. But when outright bigotry dominates a discussion it becomes boring. I reserve the right to mock bigots.}

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#347
In reply to #311

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/08/2022 6:17 PM

So, because I am open to accepting a different interpretation of a Mirror Test 'pass' , an interpretation not shared by you, you "reserve the right" to go into this foaming-at-the-mouth hate-filled tirade against me.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#349
In reply to #347

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/08/2022 6:24 PM

I'll just interpret that as an admission to a reading comprehension failure and move on.

Good Day

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hemel Hempstead, UK
Posts: 5282
Good Answers: 287
#313
In reply to #304

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/07/2022 5:53 AM

"trying to ascertain whether it has a mark on its face"

"it is able to control through its own movements."

Don't both these things require self awareness?

__________________
We are alone in the universe, or, we are not. Either way it's incredible... Adapted from R. Buckminster Fuller/Arthur C. Clarke
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#324
In reply to #313

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/07/2022 12:05 PM

You lifted those quotes from my #304 post. They are not my words. They are alternative interpretations of the Mirror Test, suggesting that behaviour that has been deemed a 'pass' does not mean the animal recognizes the image in the mirror as being itself. Such behaviour could also be the result of the animal believing the image in the mirror is another animal. Animals that display aggression towards the image in the mirror (and fail the test) is interpreted as the animal believing the image in the mirror is another animal, so it seems a reasonable possibility that non-aggressive behaviour (behaviour deemed a 'pass') could be similarly interpreted.

I prefer the second - the animal sees the image in the mirror as an odd entity that it is able to control through its own movements (D.J. Povinelli). You ask, doesn't this require self-awareness? Does a dung beetle pushing a ball of dung (controlling the dung ball by its own movements) evidence of the dung beetles self-awareness?

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#329
In reply to #324

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/07/2022 6:37 PM

"... non-aggressive behaviour (behaviour deemed a 'pass')...."

While non-aggressive behavior is likely necessary to pass, it is not sufficient. You seem to be suggesting all that is required to pass is a lack of aggression in response. Which is not the case.

Please note that some animals that do pass the test, initially act aggressively towards a mirror placed in their environment (before the actual test procedure has begun).

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#331
In reply to #329

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/07/2022 7:20 PM

I could have phrased it better but I expect Randall understood what I meant. Aggressive behaviour is interpreted as non-recognition of the image as self, but as other. Probably this led some researchers to consider the possibility that non-recognition of the image as self, but as other, was ubiquitous across all animal species. In accordance with this hypothesis, if those that responded non-aggressively to the mirror image also did not recognize the image as self, but as other, then the displayed behaviour that had been associated with a 'pass' required another explanation. Some animals (like my cats) completely ignore their mirror image. As I wrote earlier, writings on the meaning of the Mirror Test are not referred to as conclusions, but interpretations.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#332
In reply to #331

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/08/2022 6:07 AM

The behavior observed in animals that pass the test is not sufficiently explained by only assuming the animal believes the reflection is some other. Specifically the behavior must be indicative of a sense of self, i.e. attemping to get an better first hand view/checking on their own body for that mark seen in the reflection, trying to do something on their own body about the mark seen in the reflection, such as rub it off.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#340
In reply to #332

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/08/2022 10:46 AM

D. J. Povinelli's interpretation remains valid - that the animal sees the image in the mirror as an odd entity that it is able to control with its own movements. The odd entity looks like one of its own species but it has a strange marking on it forehead. In accordance with Povinelli's interpretation: The animal does not know the mark is on its own forehead, but it sees a mark on the forehead of the odd entity in the mirror. When the animal moves one of its limbs, it sees the odd entity in the mirror also move one of its limbs. In time, it makes the odd entity in the mirror touch and rub the strange mark on the odd entity's forehead.

Yesterday, Randall asked - Is it not evidence of the animal's self-awareness to be able to control an object (the image in the mirror) with its own movements? I replied - Is it evidence of a dung beetle's self-awareness that it can control a ball of dung with its own movements?

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#351
In reply to #340

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/08/2022 6:51 PM

"... . In time, it makes the odd entity in the mirror touch and rub the strange mark on the odd entity's forehead. ...."

You are adding in details that are not there. The behavior noted as indicative of a sense of self is not equivalent to manipulation of the reflected image.

Some animals attempt to bend their body to inspect the mark without the aid of the mirror on their own body (no longer viewing the reflection). The wrasse specifically moves to a place to rub/abrade the mark and then is noted to return to the mirror. No manipulation of a remote control phantom entity.

At any rate, if something can go through the mental gymnastics of thinking it has control of some odd entity which it deems not self, that not self quality necessarily is the lack of something it must otherwise have some sense of. Otherwise, if a sense of not self is lacking, an odd entity over which something realizes it has control and for which observations yield information about that which is connected and under control lacking any sense of other , effectively describes self.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#354
In reply to #351

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/08/2022 7:38 PM

Your quote: "Some animals attempt to bend their body to inspect the mark without the aid of the mirror on their own body (no longer viewing the reflection). " The typical place for the mark is on the animal's forehead. The behaviour you describe doesn't fit with this.

Your last paragraph ignores my analogy of the dung beetle. A ball of dung is something other than the dung beetle. The odd entity in the mirror is something other than the animal. We cannot assume that the animal perceives the odd entity as a living creature. It is plausible that the animal perceives it in the same way that a dung beetle perceives a ball of dung - it is something that can be made to move by the animal's own actions. There is no need to bring in concepts of sense of self or self-awareness to explain this behaviour.

The wrasse fish is an outlier. Researchers remain baffled.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#357
In reply to #354

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/08/2022 10:17 PM

You claim researchers (those with first hand knowledge) remain baffled (where did you glean this insight?).

Yet you, yourself, give no indication of any doubt in your absolute denial of any validity to the straight-forward, as-designed indication of the mirror test.

As for my part, I am baffled by your complete immunity to presentation of evidence which contradicts your beliefs.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#367
In reply to #357

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/09/2022 11:29 AM

Your quote: "You claim researchers (those with first hand knowledge) remain baffled (where did you glean this insight?)."

In an earlier post I wrote that if a test is designed to test a certain cognitive ability in animals and both apes and fish achieve a passing grade, the researchers can either continue to trust that the test is measuring something meaningful, or they can question the design and validity of the test. The cleaner wrasse behaved in a manner that was deemed a 'pass' of the Mirror Test in 2018. A number of papers have since been published attempting to come to terms with this. It has thrown researchers in this field into disarray.

You never miss an opportunity to refer to the cleaner wrasse 'pass' of the MSR test, as if it is the preeminent refutation of my scepticism of self-awareness in animals. Your certainty about the meaning of the 'pass' result of a fish is not shared by those with first hand knowledge, as a quick scan of the published papers will reveal. It has raised serious doubts about past interpretations of mark test results.

Jennifer Vonk, in Learning and Behaviour (June 2019), writes, "A fish that can act to disable a parasite (the mark) is exhibiting adaptive behaviour. A fish that can recognize itself in a mirror, or exhibit a self-concept, likely is not." She further writes: Perhaps the important lesson is that scientists should be cautious when attributing “intelligence” to various behaviours. Does the kind of body self-awareness demonstrated in the mark test really equate to concepts about one’s self as a psychological entity?

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#375
In reply to #367

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/11/2022 11:21 AM

".... Does the kind of body self-awareness demonstrated in the mark test really equate to concepts about one’s self as a psychological entity? ...."

Perhaps this reveals the problem. Your all or nothing concept of a sense of self is refusing to allow you to accept other creatures as having a sense of self.

Of course the self a wrasse senses will not be the self of a human, a wrasse is not a human it is a wrasse and its self experience will be different to the degree that a particular wrasse differs from a particular human being compared. Yet functionally this wrasse still exhibits self awareness and a sense of self in the way it relates to reflections of its own body.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#378
In reply to #375

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/11/2022 6:29 PM

I am tired of this conversation, and I am tired of your unrelenting condescending tone. Researchers are still struggling to interpret the wrasse fish 'pass' of the MSR test that occurred in 2018. You, however, claim to know exactly what it means. I suggest you contact those who conducted the 2018 test and share your insights with them.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
2
Guru
Technical Fields - Technical Writing - New Member Engineering Fields - Piping Design Engineering - New Member

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Richland, WA, USA
Posts: 20964
Good Answers: 780
#379
In reply to #378

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/11/2022 10:23 PM

If truly tired of this conversation (two consecutive posts), you might consider taking a six-month sabbatical. Several people would be grateful.

__________________
In vino veritas; in cervisia carmen; in aqua E. coli.
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#363
In reply to #354

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/09/2022 3:00 AM

I don't see what your dung beetle analogy is supposed to do to further your argument, but are you certain you have vetted your assumptions well in your analogy?

Are the clothes you pick out and choose to wear part of your person/yourself? What about your hair? Your gut biome? Is your spouse uniquely yours and is that a significant part of who you are? What about any pets? Favorite books? Maybe even your car is uniquely yours and part of you.

Some people have a significant portion of their self identity in things like those mentioned about. Those things are a real part of what makes up their self. They may so strongly identify those things as self that they may react as if to an existential threat when something like their prized possession car is threatened with destruction.

I don't know how a dung beetle feels about their dungball, buy I suspect it isn't well described as 'take it or leave it'. It will take more than a flippant conjecture to convince me that it is reasonable to state that a dung beetle perceiving their dung ball as 'self' could be dismissed out of hand.

If your gut biome, and hair on your on your head are 'you' then it isn't a stretch at all to allow the possibility that a dungbeetle could sense as self it's dung ball.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Placerville, CA (38° 45N, 120° 47'W)
Posts: 5989
Good Answers: 242
#312
In reply to #175

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/06/2022 11:55 PM
__________________
Teaching is a great experience, but there is no better teacher than experience.
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#317
In reply to #312

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/07/2022 9:34 AM

I agree with the free synopsis provided in that link. I think there are a few additional nuances required for AI or robots to evolve a sense of self-awareness. These may have been included in the original research paper or were considered too speculative to put into the paper.

The first step towards AI self-awareness is the need for the AI to improve itself or subsequent generations. (Was Windows 95 and 98 two different generations or just an improvement of the same software?) Removing the need for an external programmer allows for self-evolution to happen. The chatbots testing by other software I cited earlier is one example of how AI is already starting down this road.

The next step in AI self-awareness involves self-evaluation of multiple attributes of the AI. Anti-virus programs that examine performance or resource loss to detect an infection instead of scanning for known virulent file names are starting down this road, too.

I suspect communication on self-evaluation between AI platforms will also happen with self-awareness. I'm not sure if this communication will be a cause or effect of self-awareness.

I'm sure that many other nuances will be needed to be included for AI self-awareness to become real. I'm not sure this will happen in my lifetime but I am certain that it will one day happen.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#319
In reply to #312

Re: Is evolution correct?

01/07/2022 10:41 AM

I read it and found it very unsatisfactory. The author is asked if computers might become conscious in the future. He replies that it would be necessary for the computer to have a regulatory mechanism to sense deviations, then you would be on the way to creating feelings for computers. This is his explanation also for how consciousness developed in humans. He says, "The entire story of consciousness is really a story that the body is telling about itself." Well, computers already have elements of self-diagnosis, and they are no more conscious than pocket calculators of 50 years ago. If complexity and feed back loops are the road to consciousness, then we just need to build computers bigger and with more self-diagnostics, and at some point the computer will wake up (just as humans did presumably), and say, "I think, therefore I am." I am unconvinced. Good for him for having a go at the problem, but consciousness and how it came to be remains a mystery.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#177
In reply to #173

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/27/2021 4:17 PM

No one claimed "self-awareness no different than human".

Even within just the group comprising humans, there is wide variation in self-awareness in at least extent and intensity. Self-awareness even among individual humans can not be claimed to be 'no different' from one another.

What is it that is so threatening to you about nonhumans being capable of self awareness and perhaps introspection? Is it the possible legal ramifications or perhaps the idea that you have been making meals of things that might actively contemplate the act of you devouring the self of which they are aware?

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#178
In reply to #177

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/27/2021 6:01 PM

A wide variation in self-awareness among humans? Maybe, but there is a commonality. All humans are self-aware, and in addition, all humans know that they are self aware. In my computer/robot illustration, programming can give the appearance of self-awareness, but since the computer is not conscious of its programming, it will remain an appearance and not actual self-awareness. That is, I submit, what is happening with the creatures that pass the mirror test. There may be a handful of outliers - elephants, dolphins, whales, certain primates... It needs more investigation. To be self-aware but to also know, as we do, that we are self-aware (to know that we know), is a very high bar. The mirror test is insufficient to determine this.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 15113
Good Answers: 936
#179
In reply to #178

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/27/2021 10:37 PM

Oh will you please give it a rest.

You are clearly irrational and in denial that other species can be self-aware. You refuse to accept respected publications that other species are self-aware. I know of no better proof that other species are self-aware than a famous talking parrot apologizing for playing a poorly timed cheeky joke. How's that for knowing right from wrong. You'll probably still dismiss this for some irrational reason.

I've demonstrated that you repeatedly confuse the established meanings of "self-aware" and "introspect" to the point that we cannot trust which you mean at any point in this extended off-topic discussion.

I'm fine with you personally maintaining this irrational response over other species also containing this human attribute. I'm just tired of you shoving this opinion down our throats.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#190
In reply to #179

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/28/2021 10:09 AM

The topic of self-awareness is not off topic. I have stated that its evolutionary advantage is unclear, and no one has challenged that assertion.

The results of the Mirror Test would be in respected publications, and if the authors concluded from it that other species are self-aware, I am not similarly persuaded. A non self-aware computer/robot could pass the test, and a magpie and a fish did pass the test. It is therefore not a definitive test.

A parrot that apologizes for poorly timed humour, has been trained to respond to negative non-verbal reactions. It could as readily have been trained to pluck out the eyes of visitors, and apologize if it didn't succeed. The parrot does not take the knowledge of right and wrong prize.

I explained in my post #12 that I fully understand the difference between self-aware and introspect. Your reply was introspective silence.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7959
Good Answers: 284
#223
In reply to #190

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/30/2021 10:38 AM

'... I have stated that its evolutionary advantage is unclear, and no one has challenged that assertion. ....'

.

You stated that the evolutionary advantage of self awareness is unclear. What reason would we have to doubt that an aspect of evolution is unclear from your perspective?

No one challenged your assertion because when you claim a lack of understanding concerning this particular aspect of evolution because it fits well with the other understanding-disconnects you have displayed....only you seem to be both self aware and honest about this one....and no one wants to take that single standout away from you, lest you become completely unrelatable.

__________________
Eternal vigilance is the price of knowledge. - George Santayana
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Land of Shining Waters
Posts: 808
Good Answers: 31
#231
In reply to #223

Re: Is evolution correct?

12/30/2021 4:37 PM

Even if we don't agree that only humans are self-aware, surely we can agree that many many life forms are not self-aware, have no sense of "I", and that those life forms have got along, and get along just fine. If self-awareness is an evolutionary advantage why is it not universal among living things? More philosophically, why does the universe need consciousness? By your mocking tone, the answers to these questions are perfectly clear. Kindly share those answers with me.

__________________
It is easier to let the cat out of the bag than to put the cat back in the bag.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Register to Reply Page 2 of 6: « First < Prev 1 2 3 4 Next > Last »
This discussion was "closed" on 02/17/2022 12:27 PM. No new comments are allowed.

Comments rated to be Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive ratings to make them "good answers".

Comments rated to be "almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, rate them!
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Anonymous Poster (12); bgot (23); Brave Sir Robin (1); canadianslidewinder (143); Codemaster (5); DaveD (10); dkwarner (23); garth (1); GM1964 (7); Griffex (28); HiTekRedNek (27); hitekrednek2 (18); IQ (20); lyn (1); phoenix911 (16); PWSlack (1); Randall (37); redfred (96); setlock77 (3); SolarEagle (8); SSCpal (1); Stef (1); tkot (1); Tornado (23); truth is not a compromise (63)

Previous in Forum: Old pipe insulation: is it amosite asbestos?   Next in Forum: Parker Solar Probe touches surface of the sun

Advertisement