Re: Irreducible complexity analogs

Bill Hamilton (whamilto@mich.com)
Fri, 29 Nov 1996 14:13:30 -0500

I wrote
><<Trial and error is
>certainly not the very definition of the kind of design an omnipotent,
>omniscient God produces.>>

Jim wrote
>
>We
>were talking about human intelligence plugged into a system designed with a
>goal: product development. That's all.

Since I explicitly stated that no overall design had been applied to Moog's
development process, Jim must be referring to design by some outside agency
not detectible by the humans working within the system. This really sounds
like Howard's argument: the design is there, but humans can't see it.
Welcome aboard, Jim.

Jim also wrote

>Human intelligent design is not really
>close to the Grand Design after all, is it? That's why I find these analogs so
>weak.
>
Agreed on both points.

Bill Hamilton
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William E. Hamilton, Jr., Ph.D.
1346 W. Fairview Lane
Rochester, MI 48306
(810) 652 4148