[Quote]
How does the scientific community explain specified
complexity? Usually via an evolutionary algorithm. By an
evolutionary algorithm I mean any algorithm that generates
contingency via some chance process and then sifts the
so-generated contingency via some law-like process. The
Darwinian mutation-selection mechanism, neural nets, and
genetic algorithms all fall within this broad definition of
evolutionary algorithms. Now the problem with invoking
evolutionary algorithms to explain specified complexity at the
origin of life is absence of any identifiable evolutionary
algorithm that might account for it. Once life has started and
self-replication has begun, the Darwinian mechanism is usually
invoked to explain the specified complexity of living things.
[End Quote - WA Dembski, Explaining Specified Complexity,
<http://www.baylor.edu/~William_Dembski/docs_articles/meta139.htm>]
I would like to see the justification for including "neural
nets" in "evolutionary algorithms". It is obvious that the
description given in the above quote is inadequate, since many
if not most artificial neural system models either do not
utilize "chance" or have no necessary dependence upon "chance"
processes used as conventions. Given that not all ANS models
"sift contingency", how is it accurate to state that the whole
field of ANS can be considered a variant of "evolutionary
algorithms"?
Wesley
cc: Calvin evolution reflector, evolution@calvin.edu
<http://inia.cls.org/~welsberr/ae/dembski_wa.html#correspondence>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Oct 21 2000 - 12:05:21 EDT