RE: [asa] Guided evolution mechanism?

"It is difficult to believe that they have all resulted from Darwinian 'accumulation by chance'. Whether one wants it or not, one is taken by the impression of forces or tendencies away from 'the plain and simple' in certain directions towards the complicated. The 'plain and simple' seems to represent an unstable state of affairs. A departure from it provokes forces-so it seems-towards a further departure, and in the same direction. That would be difficult to understand if the development of a particular device, mechanism, organ, useful behaviour, were produced by a long pearlstring of chance events, independent of each other, such as one is used to thinking of in terms of Darwin's original conception. Actually, I believe, only the first small start 'in a certain direction' has this structure. It produces itself circumstances which 'hammer the plastic material'-by selection-more and more systematically in the direction of the advantage gained by the outset. In metaph!
 orical speech one might say: the species has found out in which direction its chance in life lies and pursues this path." From "Mind and Matter" by Erwin Schrödinger.

 
Moorad

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of Jim Armstrong
Sent: Wed 11/12/2008 12:59 PM
To: ASA
Subject: Re: [asa] Guided evolution mechanism?

I am not sure I understand the need for this functionality, given that
the mutation/selection collaboration seems to essentially accomplish
that same result, I wouldn't think it necessary EXCEPT as it might apply
to the fundamental character (intrinsic plan?) of Creation as created,
so-called front-loading. JimA

Christine Smith wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Well, I think this would impact some of the discussions we've been having :)
>
> >From the ASA Science & Faith blog: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081111183039.htm
>
> Excerpt: "Applying the concepts of control theory, a body of knowledge that deals with the behavior of dynamical systems, the researchers concluded that this self-correcting behavior could only be possible if, during the early stages of evolution, the proteins had developed a self-regulating mechanism, analogous to a car's cruise control or a home's thermostat, allowing them to fine-tune and control their subsequent evolution....
>
> ....The scientists do not know how the cellular machinery guiding this process may have originated, but they emphatically said it does not buttress the case for intelligent design, a controversial notion that posits the existence of a creator responsible for complexity in nature."
>
> Can someone provide some more background on "control theory"?
>
> It sounds to me like they're basically saying that cells, or the chemical components of cells, can actually direct (or at least exercise influence over) their own evolution? If so, does this imply that they are conscious in some manner? How else could they "control" anything in an "intentional" sense? If it is indeed "intentional control" at the cellular level, then besides consciousness residing at that level, I can't help but to think it would bolster the design argument?
>
> Comments? Thoughts?
>
> In Christ,
> Christine
>
> "For we walk by faith, not by sight" ~II Corinthians 5:7
>
> Help save the life of a homeless animal--visit www.azrescue.org to find out how.
>
> Recycling a single aluminum can conserves enough energy to power your TV for 3 hours--Reduce, Reuse, Recycle! Learn more at www.cleanup.org
>
> 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.
Received on Wed Nov 12 13:37:18 2008