- Feb 4, 2006
- 46,773
- 10,981
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
It seems that the concept and recognition of purposeful design has been deliberately hidden in the language of evolutionary science.
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~grafen/cv/fisher.pdf
"Now Fisher used his fundamental theorem in various ways in his book and subsequently. The major effect was that he used it as a licence for regulated anthropomorphism. He discussed organisms as acting to maximize their fitness as though, in line with our discussion of optimization programs, they were rational creatures maximizing a utility function.
Let us ponder this licence a little. Why is a licence needed? Anthropomorphism has been a besetting sin of biologists and others for centuries in understanding organic design. It is essential for a materialist explanation of design to avoid requiring a ghost in the machine. Yet it is also virtually impossible to discuss design without using terms of purpose, so-called intentional terms. To say the eye is for seeing is to invoke intention, just as to say that the kidney processes
waste products, the liver regulates blood sugar, or the eye blink is a reflex to protect the eye. But a good materialist needs an excuse for using intentional terms, unavoidable though they are, and a good excuse, a written and logically argued excuse, may be called a licence."
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~grafen/cv/fisher.pdf
"Now Fisher used his fundamental theorem in various ways in his book and subsequently. The major effect was that he used it as a licence for regulated anthropomorphism. He discussed organisms as acting to maximize their fitness as though, in line with our discussion of optimization programs, they were rational creatures maximizing a utility function.
Let us ponder this licence a little. Why is a licence needed? Anthropomorphism has been a besetting sin of biologists and others for centuries in understanding organic design. It is essential for a materialist explanation of design to avoid requiring a ghost in the machine. Yet it is also virtually impossible to discuss design without using terms of purpose, so-called intentional terms. To say the eye is for seeing is to invoke intention, just as to say that the kidney processes
waste products, the liver regulates blood sugar, or the eye blink is a reflex to protect the eye. But a good materialist needs an excuse for using intentional terms, unavoidable though they are, and a good excuse, a written and logically argued excuse, may be called a licence."
Last edited: