A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Discussions on the philosophical foundations, assumptions, and implications of science, including the natural sciences.

Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 12:14 am 

Positor » June 27th, 2017, 9:09 am wrote:How, then, can creationists rationally deny the truth of natural selection? Are they denying a tautology?


As I see things, Positor (probably confused as usual), it's not about denying the truth of natural selection. Rather, (given the presuppositions), natural selection cannot fail to be true.

I can't speak for slimy Creationists.

Now, those so inclined can try to wriggle out of this by appealing to some kind of "propensity" interpretation of fitness. To wit, those organisms with the good stuff tend to (statistically speaking) outdo the competition.

Now we approach vacuous tautology, rather than simply assert it.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 12:18 am 

Positor » June 27th, 2017, 9:09 am wrote:But if so, evolution involves more than a mere tautology; it claims something informative.



What exactly?
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 12:20 am 

David Stove is so wonderfully insightful on all this. Why don't you bastards take a break from curing erectile dysfunction and read him?

Tee hee. (You know I love ya)
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 12:22 am 

Positor » June 27th, 2017, 9:09 am wrote:
We could also argue that "the fit outdo the unfit" is not a tautology, since there are possible worlds in which God intervenes miraculously to preserve species that are unfit to survive naturally. (It would be greatly stretching the meaning of "fit" to include "apt to be saved by God when all else fails".)


Exactly right! The fit can't lose if we define them right.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 12:23 am 

Bobby Fischer was fitter than that Russian dude.

How do I know?

Well, he won.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 12:27 am 

What I find fascinating in all this, is that natural selection seems to me like a tautology, but an argument can be made (Elliott Sober does it) it's a useful tautology.

In other words, the conclusion of a deductive argument contains nothing not already implicit in the premises. But we might not have seen what is implicit.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 12:30 am 

Braininvat » June 27th, 2017, 9:20 am wrote:

No you haven't. Your explorations have had free reign here and you're allowed to drink and talk about boobs and meander through all sorts of side issues in your quest for chinks in the armor of science.


First things first. I can't find my boobs thread. I'd like to see the manager.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 12:34 am 

Braininvat » June 27th, 2017, 9:20 am wrote:
No you haven't. Your explorations have had free reign here and you're allowed to drink and talk about boobs and meander through all sorts of side issues in your quest for chinks in the armor of science. .


Oh gosh. I thought this would be clear by now. I want what you want. Bionic arms and a spare liver.

I want you to be better than you are.

You could be swingin' on a star.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 12:38 am 

Braininvat » June 27th, 2017, 9:20 am wrote:Nobody in evolutionary biology, AFAIK, talks about "nice" traits. No more of this fancy jargon, man!



Well, pardon me all over the place lol. What do they talk about then?

If Dawkins can say "selfish" why can't I say "nice"?

Coz he's good looking?
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 12:40 am 

Oh, and P.S. Thanks BiV. I always worry I may be misread. Thank you for the "free reign".

Truth doesn't scare us, eh? Just wives with rolling pins and a poor attitude.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 12:43 am 

Some members with no life might enjoy this:

http://documentshare.tips/images/server ... 9ae3d5.pdf

Just don't expect me to read it, unless you raise the pay.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 12:47 am 

SciameriKen » June 27th, 2017, 9:42 am wrote:Sealioning! I finally remember the term!!


Erm. WTF is sealioning?
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 1:01 am 

I'll have your guts for gaaaaaarters!!!!

Oops, wrong window. Better log off .....
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby SciameriKen on June 27th, 2017, 1:19 am 

Image

Image
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 1:21 am 

Oh dear. He's been sending me death threats in PM too. Not that I mind.

Just try not to get any in my hair.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 1:22 am 

I have a good idea, Ken. Walk ten miles in my shoes.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 7:32 am 

Do you think a case can be made that the definition of "fitness" has changed? I'll make one if you pay.

It's my own opinion that the present day technical understanding of fitness is not what Darwin had in mind.

He took it to be that which causes reproductive success. And I'd suggest this is our pre-reflective intuitive understanding of the term. These days, in its various manifestations, it's identified with reproductive success.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 7:51 am 

Call it sealioning if you like. I'm just trying to get a better grip on the concepts involved.

Didn't someone once say, the problem with evolutionary theory is that every fool thinks he understands it.

I know I don't.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby SciameriKen on June 27th, 2017, 9:23 am 

If certain heritable characters increase or decrease the chances of survival and reproduction of their bearers, then it follows mechanically (by definition of "heritable") that those characters that improve survival and reproduction will increase in frequency over generations. This is precisely what is called "evolution by natural selection." On the other hand, if the characters which lead to differential reproductive success are not heritable, then no meaningful evolution will occur, "survival of the fittest" or not: if improvement in reproductive success is caused by traits that are not heritable, then there is no reason why these traits should increase in frequency over generations. In other words, natural selection does not simply state that "survivors survive" or "reproducers reproduce"; rather, it states that "survivors survive, reproduce and therefore propagate any heritable characters which have affected their survival and reproductive success". This statement is not tautological: it hinges on the testable hypothesis that such fitness-impacting heritable variations actually exist (a hypothesis that has been amply confirmed.)

Here are some resources Ships:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fittest
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
User avatar
SciameriKen
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 9:35 am 

Testable, eh? So the unfit might get the upper hand?

You'll have to explain that.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 9:36 am 

The first shall be last... Hmm, sounds familiar
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 9:36 am 

and it's Mister NoShips to you
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby TheVat on June 27th, 2017, 9:52 am 

LP mutation spreading through Europe rapidly so that now 80% or more of us can digest milk. By allowing much higher protein intake (especially when game was scarce), the LP gene conferred considerable reproductive advantage to those who had it. Allowed pastoralist cultures (herd animals kept for milk) to thrive.
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7295
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 9:55 am 

Makes no sense to me. How come we don't all die immediately after drinking milk?
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 9:56 am 

Oh, I see now. That would make us unfit, and we'd be eradicated. Onward Christian fit soldiers....
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby Positor on June 27th, 2017, 9:56 am 

NoShips » June 27th, 2017, 5:18 am wrote:
Positor » June 27th, 2017, 9:09 am wrote:But if so, evolution involves more than a mere tautology; it claims something informative.

What exactly?

That new species can evolve naturally, rather than (as was previously thought, and as creationists still believe) only be created by divine intervention, as in the Book of Genesis.
Positor
Active Member
 
Posts: 1117
Joined: 05 Feb 2010


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 9:57 am 

Positor » June 27th, 2017, 10:56 pm wrote:
NoShips » June 27th, 2017, 5:18 am wrote:
Positor » June 27th, 2017, 9:09 am wrote:But if so, evolution involves more than a mere tautology; it claims something informative.

What exactly?

That new species can evolve naturally, rather than (as was previously thought, and as creationists still believe) only be created by divine intervention, as in the Book of Genesis.


Which is to say nothing more than the deus ex machina didn't do it. Right?
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 9:58 am 

Ken said "informative".

All I've learned is Zeus gets the boot.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 10:05 am 

You know, this is what Darwin and his cohorts (the whaddyacllemagain) were worried about: the unfit getting the upper hand.

Ah yes, eugenics.
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


Re: A Simple Question: Should We Believe Scientists?

Postby NoShips on June 27th, 2017, 10:07 am 

By changing the definition, they can't get the upper hand

Easy as A B C, Michael
User avatar
NoShips
Active Member
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan


PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy of Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests