intelligence

okay, so this whole intelligent design thing brings up an interesting topic -- at least, it's interesting to me.

i believe that there is no randomness in the universe. that there are intrinsic rules that govern all interactions between matter/energy/force. that if you recreate the exact same circumstances, the same result will occur -- over and over. of course, recreating the exact same circumstances is impossible, so it's difficult to prove.

anyway, this means that humans (as physical entities) are governed by the same intrinsic rules. not that there are "human" scale rules, just that our brain chemisty is just like other chemisty -- action yields reaction (or more precisely, reaction yields reaction). everything about our being is grounded in these physical rules.

our thoughts and emotions are governed by our brain chemistry -- our personality, sense of humor, ability to comprehend -- everything. this includes intelligence and the whole decision making process (ie, no free will).


this relates to intelligent design in that the primary concept behind id is the generalization that since no complex system has been encountered that was verifiably not designed by an intelligent being, all complex systems were probably designed by intelligent beings. my thought, tho, is that as products of nature itself, everything a human creates is in effect a natural product. we simply don't have the ability to be unnatural.

 

I'm gonna have to take some shrooms and read that again at some point

 

I know. I read it and then thought huh? Did he ask a question?

 

This relates loosely to chaos theory. When people assume that nature can never produce anything particularly complex, they're grossly underestimating the capabilities of natural forces. The pressures to seek equilibrium produce remarkably complex environments and processes in nature. (this ties into something I was idly thinking about in the drive-through at Wendy's: namely that the harmony of nature is the best argument for a God, and humanity is the best argument against one) So things that look chaotic and directionless are actually highly complex and directed.

But back to what seems to be your point, humans are technically a branch of nature, but the way we have radically changed and even threatened the equilibrium of the world is evidence enough for me that something radically different happens in our actions than that of other natural beings. I suppose that comes from consciousness, as instinct would presumably seek that natural balance.

 

i know, i know... i guess my determinism stuff is a lot like miss tery's extropianism. it ellicits a whole lot of blank stares.

i am curious what people think of this, tho.


is there such a thing as random? i don't believe there is. i believe that every action is a defined reaction to a previous action (which is by definition a reaction itself).

i believe human's are physical beings and each physical component of a human behaves in accordance with the natural rules of the physical universe. i believe the brain is an electro-chemical processing unit that also simply reacts to the world. with that in mind, free will comes into question. i don't believe it exists.

without free will, intelligence as a differentiating factor is useless. that is, if every ounce of by being and every thought in my head is the result of natural laws governing the universe, then my intelligence is illusory (just like a roulette wheel isn't really random).

if that's the case, then the root observation for intelligent design -- for all comlpex systems that we can identify an origin, that origin is an intelligent designer -- falls away because there is no intelligence that isn't rooted in nature. therefore, all complex systems are truly the invention of nature by means of a pseudo-intelligent designer.

 

So, what was the initial action?

 

Take a course in chaos theory.


And I can tell you've been listening to too much Tool.

 

but as a product of nature, i don't think we can do anything unnatural. people get the mistaken impression that our fears about global warming, for example, are selfless and overly preoccupied with saving nature. on the contrary, nature will be fine -- it's more about trying to save our skinny asses. humans have only been around for a sliver of time on earth, natural life on earth has us beat by a mile.

 

good question. i dunno if there was one. there's an interesting thing about infinity. people can project infinity into the future with much greater ease than they can project it into the past. i'm not sure why that is. something without an end is easier to grasp than something without a beginning. probably has something to do with birth and death, but that's just a wild guess.

 

courses are for pussies.

seriously, tho. chaos theory doesn't propose randomness, correct? only that simple systems can create complex patterns that look random, but aren't. yes?

that is impossible.