Posted: Apr 14, 2012 6:49 pm
by Cito di Pense
Destroyer wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote:
Destroyer wrote:
Cito di Pense wrote: Because you deny or can't imagine or understand evolution from simple beginnings?

What do you think "evolution from simple beginnings" actually means?


A gentle tap from my clue bat, Destroyer: 'Simple' is taken relative to presently-observed complexity.

You don't have any experiences beyond those of the empirical world with which to develop a semantics for 'evolution'.
You can talk about your meditations, but I can call what you say 'anecdotes' unless you can do something empirical besides make noises.

Does presently-observed complexity rule out idealism? Because that is what you seemed to be saying to Little idiot.

As far as experiences "beyond the empirical world" go, you will never ever hear such a thing from me!


Nothing rules out any metaphysics, or proves it. That's what makes metaphysics so aimless. Wibblers find a sort of refuge in claims that cannot be falsified. It all depends on your disposition, and whether you find it uncomfortable to risk discovering that you are wrong.

With idealism, some of these folks are positing a Master Mind, but I find that a bit lacking in parsimony, and the complexity of the Master Mind seems to need an evolution of its own from simple beginnings, or else risk being an ex recto assertion.

Cellular automata simulations show that very complex behaviour can be produced by a small set of very simple rules.