Hi there,
So yes, the intelligent among you will simply reply "it depends on the selection pressure that is affecting the two alternatives!", but I wonder if simplifying it in that way, undercuts the importance of finding greater Evolution. For example, if I had a doubt that begging the connection was greater, and I found I could work more effectively by simply begging the question - would that not lead to greater Evolution, for me?
Begging the connection is fine, if you have a target change in mind and you need to inflate the importance of that target, but if you need to manipulate the expression of that target and it is not likely that pressure will come to add to the connection, on which the target is based - then you are best to just keep begging the question, hoping that some development that affects the interpretation of the target will come along? We should not be too quick to rule out the strength of what we already have?
I think basically, Evolutionists throw the baby out with the bathwater - saying "we have found more of a connection" when really it is mastering the connection we already have that is important. You could go the other way and beg the relation, but that too would be less dynamic than simply begging the question, as pertains to cognition. No one is going to say "oh, begging the question, we stopped doing that" as if there is something greater about begging the connection (to another species even, think of it!). That's really my point, you are not actually proving anything by begging something, until you have evaluated what aspect of your design (design - sic) is being affected or drawn upon, by that begging.
Maybe you have thoughts about how you stopped begging in general, it's not impossible.
Thanks,
C
So yes, the intelligent among you will simply reply "it depends on the selection pressure that is affecting the two alternatives!", but I wonder if simplifying it in that way, undercuts the importance of finding greater Evolution. For example, if I had a doubt that begging the connection was greater, and I found I could work more effectively by simply begging the question - would that not lead to greater Evolution, for me?
Begging the connection is fine, if you have a target change in mind and you need to inflate the importance of that target, but if you need to manipulate the expression of that target and it is not likely that pressure will come to add to the connection, on which the target is based - then you are best to just keep begging the question, hoping that some development that affects the interpretation of the target will come along? We should not be too quick to rule out the strength of what we already have?
I think basically, Evolutionists throw the baby out with the bathwater - saying "we have found more of a connection" when really it is mastering the connection we already have that is important. You could go the other way and beg the relation, but that too would be less dynamic than simply begging the question, as pertains to cognition. No one is going to say "oh, begging the question, we stopped doing that" as if there is something greater about begging the connection (to another species even, think of it!). That's really my point, you are not actually proving anything by begging something, until you have evaluated what aspect of your design (design - sic) is being affected or drawn upon, by that begging.
Maybe you have thoughts about how you stopped begging in general, it's not impossible.
Thanks,
C
