Bernie,
Don't forget that parasites have simplified their structure over time.
It's not always from simple to complex, although there have been people
obsessed with the notion of universal progress.
Dave (ASA)
On Thu, 15 Jan 2009 09:15:19 -0800 "Dehler, Bernie"
<bernie.dehler@intel.com> writes:
> Pastor Murray said:
> "... any talk of "meme evolution" MUST carry with it a clear
> emphasis that it IS distinct from biological evolution AND that it
> necessarily involves intelligent agency."
>
> It seems so obvious that meme generation depends on intelligent
> agency- that's what the brain does- it THINKS. Without the brain-
> there's no meme- no intelligence. Brains were made to think- that
> is a major function of the organ.
>
> Pastor Murray says:
> "In the end analysis you're now simply arguing what Greg Arago has
> been saying for years - that "evolution" as an broad umbrella term
> means nothing more specific than simply "change over time,""
>
> I'd say "change over time," as well as from "simple to complex."
> The change over time is also step-wise... just like kids go to grade
> school before high-school before college (common sense, as well as
> highlighting the education-training meme).
>
> ...Bernie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]
> On Behalf Of Murray Hogg
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 4:46 PM
> To: ASA
> Subject: Re: [asa] Darwin only biological evolution? (can anything
> exist without evolution?)
>
> Hi Bernie,
>
> In the end analysis you're now simply arguing what Greg Arago has
> been saying for years - that "evolution" as an broad umbrella term
> means nothing more specific than simply "change over time," that not
> all "change over time" is of the same sort, and that we need to
> qualify the use of "evolution" in order to make clear what sort of
> "change over time" we're talking about.
>
> And this brings us back full-circle to David O.'s point that any
> disagreement on the matter is a matter of semantics (but not
> "merely" a matter of semantics). And as long as we keep in mind that
> the mechanisms of "biological evolution" don't apply to what you're
> calling "meme evolution" (which was Iain's point) then I don't see
> any cause for strident objection.
>
> I would, however, reiterate the point which I made in response to
> David O.: "evolution" has become such a culturally significant term
> that is critical that any talk of "meme evolution" MUST carry with
> it a clear emphasis that it IS distinct from biological evolution
> AND that it necessarily involves intelligent agency. Failing such
> distinctions one risks falling into the error of thinking that
> evolution of ideas happens in exactly the same way as evolution of
> bacteria and that, therefore, intelligent agency is necessarily
> EXCLUDED.
>
> What you may have missed in my response to David O., by the way, was
> that I was AGREEING with you but merely extending the point to
> indicate the cultural significance of the terminology in question. I
> wasn't claiming you hadn't made the point, I was suggesting that the
> point is so important that it cannot be over-emphasized.
>
> Blessings,
> Murray
>
> Dehler, Bernie wrote:
> > Pastor Murray- you also said later:
> > " The question to be asked in respects of the suggestion that
> Beethoven's Ninth "evolved" is "what accounts for the difference?"
> If the answer is "intelligent agency" then I think Iain can rest his
> case - Beethoven's Ninth simply DIDN'T "evolve" through the same
> sort of processes involved in biological evolution."
> >
> > I don't see how Ian can "rest his case" because biological
> evolution doesn't apply to meme evolution, anymore than cosmological
> evolution applies to biological evolution.
> >
> > The fallacy for rejecting memes is in thinking that new thoughts
> violate the idea of meme evolution.
> >
> > Example: suppose I want to invent a flying car. I could put a car
> gas engine in it. After trying it, I could learn and then decide to
> switch to a jet engine. Jet engines are radically different than a
> car gas engine. Ian seems to think that if the change is small,
> like going from a small to a large car gas-powered engine, that
> could be meme evolution but not going from car to jet engine.
> That's the fallacy.
> >
> > In this way, what's the difference between Beethoven composing a
> masterpiece and a 3rd yr piano student writing a new song-- it is
> only a matter of degree. So what? Ian is impressed by the degree
> of change. To me, it is like being impressed that a car can go 50
> mph, but not impressed that it can go 15 mph.
> >
> > ...Bernie
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Murray Hogg
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 3:17 PM
> > To: ASA
> > Subject: Re: [asa] Darwin only biological evolution? (can anything
> exist without evolution?)
> >
> > I was responding to David not offering a critique of your remarks,
> Bernie.
> >
> > Dehler, Bernie wrote:
> >> Pastor Murray said:
> >> " It's frankly critical that we be very clear that ideas do NOT
> evolve in the same way as bacteria."
> >>
> >> I thought I also clearly said that. It makes me wonder if you
> read what I wrote.
> >
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> >
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
____________________________________________________________
Too many bills? Click here to simplify your life and lower your debt.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw2PBHqmHX5FCyxYZnkt5mQT00Ea5zCRvnann8al321sSmHoJ/
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jan 15 13:32:03 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 15 2009 - 13:32:03 EST