Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sy Borg]

Eric, this may help sort out some of your confusion regarding this issue:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog ... not-random

No, Evolution is Not Random
And natural selection is not a chance process.

Posted December 3, 2021 | Reviewed by Kaja Perina

Key points

- Evolution is not random and natural selection is not a chance process.
- The core mistake involves mixing up natural selection and mutation.
- Resolving the confusion is key to understanding evolution and natural selection.

Have you ever come across a statement like this:

“I can’t believe that something as beautiful and complex as the human eye could be the result of a random process like evolution”?

Or this:

“It seems implausible that the intricate molecular machinery of the cell – a finely-tuned nanofactory of exquisite complexity – could have arisen by chance”?

The basic argument being made is as follows:

Premise 1. These complex, organized, functional parts of the body and brain could not possibly have arisen by chance.

Premise 2. Evolution is a chance process.

Conclusion: Therefore, these complex parts of the body and brain cannot be a product of evolution.

The fatal flaw in this argument is that premise 2 is incorrect. Evolution is not a chance-driven process; that is a widespread misconception.

... natural selection, is not random at all. In fact, it is the diametric opposite of randomness. In this step, mutations that turn out to be beneficial to the organism are more likely to make it into the next generation precisely because they aid the organism’s survival or reproduction. Mutations that are harmful are less likely to make it into the next generation precisely because they lower the organism’s likelihood of survival or reproduction. If you give it a moment’s thought, you will see that this is the opposite of a random relationship. If something is random, it is inherently unpredictable and not orderly. Natural selection is the opposite. It is logical and predictable: the likelihood that a mutation will make it into the next generation depends, in a predictable way, on its effects on survival and reproduction. Beneficial mutations tend to get passed on, whereas detrimental ones are weeded out. This is a constrained and orderly relationship – the opposite of “randomness”.

The core mistake is that people sometimes confuse mutations (which are random) with natural selection (which is not random). Evolution is a process in which randomly mutated genes pass through the highly non-random sieve of natural selection.

Note, genetic mutations may not be random but are also subject to competition.

Hello Sy Borg, I have said several times on this thread that I have no problem with natural selection, and I accept it, no problem, honestly.

Having read through the link you posted, I see you have edited one key passage out of your link; so I have posted it below. I can understand why you would want to omit this quote, it's because it confirms everything I have been saying.

Step 1, mutation, is random. Mutations don’t arise in order to fill a current “need” of the organism. They are blind and they lack foresight, so they also can’t anticipate future needs. In this sense, they can reasonably be described as random. They can also be thought of as “random” in the sense that they are not automatically helpful; a new mutation may turn out to be beneficial or harmful or neutral.

Genetic drift, random mutation does not have to produce millions / billions of cells into a left hand. It does not have to redesign a complex mirror image for the right hand. But if genetic drift of millions/billions of cells did randomly create a left hand, then and only then could natural selection do its job.

... natural selection,

For some reason you also chose to omit the words Step 2 from your link, and replace them with three dots.

You are wrong (again) to claim I omitted anything. I could have just provided the link without quotes, but provided some snips for an overview. Your complaint is basically that I did not quote the entire article.

I do not understand your point about hands. Stem cells form the germ of body parts, which grow from there. There is no need to refer to Iron Age Middle Eastern mythology to explain evolution, just as there's no need to refer to tenth century Chinese beliefs.

Did you check the video, Inevitable Life? That's the best material I know of regarding the questions you ask about evolution. If you are interested in evolution, rather than just trying to find angles that might undermine it, you will not just watch that video once, but multiple times.

[EricPH]

You are wrong (again) to claim I omitted anything. I could have just provided the link without quotes, but provided some snips for an overview. Your complaint is basically that I did not quote the entire article.

The snips you quoted for an overview, amounted to about 90% of the article. I can find no logical reason for you to cut this small section from your link. In order to completely embrace evolution you must also include the paragraph you cut from the link. Without mutation which is random and genetic drift, there is no theory of evolution.

The missing link from your article -

Step 1, mutation, is random. Mutations don’t arise in order to fill a current “need” of the organism. They are blind and they lack foresight, so they also can’t anticipate future needs. In this sense, they can reasonably be described as random. They can also be thought of as “random” in the sense that they are not automatically helpful; a new mutation may turn out to be beneficial or harmful or neutral.

[Belindi]

Eric wrote:

What physical laws can blindly organise trillions of cells into jaw bones, vertebrae, limbs, teeth, etc.

RNA is a copy, or a transcription, of DNA. See, the DNA is very important, since it holds the information needed for making new cells and maintaining life, so it never leaves the nucleus. The RNA is the one that goes out to do work throughout the cell.

RNA is a chemical molecule that has the property of holding that particular sort of information.
A molecule is a group of atoms bonded together, representing the smallest fundamental unit of a chemical compound that can take part in a chemical reaction. Different molecules have different properties.

Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is a molecule that contains the biological instructions that make each species unique. DNA, along with the instructions it contains, is passed from adult organisms to their offspring during reproduction.

I coloured the quotations which I copied from googling responsible sources of information.

[Sy Borg]

You are wrong (again) to claim I omitted anything. I could have just provided the link without quotes, but provided some snips for an overview. Your complaint is basically that I did not quote the entire article.

The snips you quoted for an overview, amounted to about 90% of the article. I can find no logical reason for you to cut this small section from your link. In order to completely embrace evolution you must also include the paragraph you cut from the link. Without mutation which is random and genetic drift, there is no theory of evolution.

The missing link from your article -

Step 1, mutation, is random. Mutations don’t arise in order to fill a current “need” of the organism. They are blind and they lack foresight, so they also can’t anticipate future needs. In this sense, they can reasonably be described as random. They can also be thought of as “random” in the sense that they are not automatically helpful; a new mutation may turn out to be beneficial or harmful or neutral.

Rubbish. To start, you simply have to accept evolution in the same way as you accept gravity. It's simply madness - an abrogation of reason - to pretend that all the research and testing amounts to nothing based on a confused literalist interpretation of a Middle Eastern Iron Age mythology. In philosophy, the capacity to reason is a baseline skill. If you eschew reason, then why are you here?

I posted further information correcting the older article's seemingly incorrect assumption that genetic mutations are random, but it may not suit your narrative to acknowledge that - or to acknowledge that video I have asked you about five times to watch. Instead, you pretend I'm engaged in some conspiracy to hide information (in which case, I would not have provided a link, but logic is apparently not as aspect of your dishonest implications.

[Belindi]

Eric, the means by which chemical substances get organised so they are life forms is DNA. DNA is a chemical that contains the information to make new cells.

Natural selection ensures that , over millions of years, only the life forms (their genes)that can live long enough to reproduce themselves can survive the struggle for existence.

[EricPH]

Eric, the means by which chemical substances get organised so they are life forms is DNA. DNA is a chemical that contains the information to make new cells.

Thanks Belindi, RNA, DNA are like Lego bricks. They come in different shapes, sizes and colours, but in order to build anything, Lego bricks have to be sorted and assembled in some order. We would use intelligent design to assemble Lego bricks, but evolution relies on mutation which is described in Sy Borg's link below

Sy Borg's link

https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog ... not-random
Step 1, mutation, is random. Mutations don’t arise in order to fill a current “need” of the organism. They are blind and they lack foresight, so they also can’t anticipate future needs. In this sense, they can reasonably be described as random.
They can also be thought of as “random” in the sense that they are not automatically helpful; a new mutation may turn out to be beneficial or harmful or neutral.

Random mutation is needed before natural selection can work. Starting from 3.7 million years ago, there are no organising Hox gene, there are no other genetic organising systems in place. For about three billion years there was not the need for any mutations that would become vertebrae, jaws, fins, rib cages etc, and life is happy.

Can you imagine a trillion Lego bricks in one big heap, and you had to assemble them in the shape of a fish, complete with its skeleton. You can have as many billions of attempts as you like. There are some conditions, a small fish of around a trillion cells would become full size within about a year. This means you would have to assemble the Lego bricks at the rate of about three billion every day, or about a hundred million bricks every hour for a year. And if this was to be done in some kind of random way, you would need a blindfold to make it more realistic.

Natural selection ensures that , over millions of years, only the life forms (their genes)that can live long enough to reproduce themselves can survive the struggle for existence.

Natural selection can only have a meaning if mutation has first created something, Referring back to Sy Borg's link, Mutation Is random.

[EricPH]

the capacity to reason is a baseline skill.

Atheists don't have a monopoly on reason, reason can be used to come to other conclusions.

Rubbish. To start, you simply have to accept evolution in the same way as you accept gravity.

There are equations to calculate gravity, but no equations to calculate evolution,

I posted further information correcting the older article's seemingly incorrect assumption that genetic mutations are random, but it may not suit your narrative to acknowledge that

I have always said mutations are random and your last link confirmed it..

- or to acknowledge that video I have asked you about five times to watch.

Why should I watch your video, when you call me dishonest and mock my beliefs? Having said that, I did spend an hour of my time watching your video when you first posted the link. It was full of clever atheist arguments, but lacked the evidence to back the claims. I have carefully read every link you have posted, that is how I noticed the missing comments about mutations being random.

[EricPH]

RNA, DNA are like Lego bricks. They come in different shapes, sizes and colours, but in order to build anything, Lego bricks have to be sorted and assembled in some order. We would use intelligent design to assemble Lego bricks, but evolution relies on mutation which is described in Sy Borg's link below

Random mutation is needed before natural selection can work. Starting from 3.7 million years ago, there are no organising Hox gene, there are no other genetic organising systems in place. For about three billion years there was not the need for any mutations that would become vertebrae, jaws, fins, rib cages etc, and life is happy.

Can you imagine a trillion Lego bricks in one big heap, and you had to assemble them in the shape of a fish, complete with its skeleton. You can have as many billions of attempts as you like. There are some conditions, a small fish of around a trillion cells would become full size within about a year. This means you would have to assemble the Lego bricks at the rate of about three billion every day, or about a hundred million bricks every hour for a year. And if this was to be done in some kind of random way, you would need a blindfold to make it more realistic.

Natural selection can only have a meaning if mutation has first created something, Referring back to Sy Borg's link, Mutation Is random.

Having had time to reflect on my last post, I feel I have underestimated the problem for blind evolution. Imagine a pile of a trillion Lego bricks, every single brick has an individual code written on it. This code will dictate where each brick fits in relation to every other brick when it is assembled. This code has to be logged, so when you make the next generation trillion brick structure, it will be the same as the previous one.

Each cell in a small trillion cell fish will have a code that will dictate where the cell fits. The fish become fully grown in about a year, meaning cells are assembled at about a hundred million per hour every hour for a year. This code would have to be copied, so it can be passed onto the next generation. Any change will only become beneficial when it has been passed through a population. A generation might be a year, but any mutation might take twenty, plus generations to pass through a population.

There can be a thousand trillion plus cells in larger species. A generation might be ten to fifteen years, and population numbers will be smaller. The odds increase exponentially with larger species. Bones appeared on the evolution time line less than 700 million years ago. It can take as many as twenty years for some species of shark to reach sexual maturity. It might take a hundred years for a beneficial mutation to pass through a shark population.

How can any blind natural system; come up with these organisational skills without any planned help?

[Belindi]

Eric, the means by which chemical substances get organised so they are life forms is DNA. DNA is a chemical that contains the information to make new cells.

Thanks Belindi, RNA, DNA are like Lego bricks. They come in different shapes, sizes and colours, but in order to build anything, Lego bricks have to be sorted and assembled in some order. We would use intelligent design to assemble Lego bricks, but evolution relies on mutation which is described in Sy Borg's link below

Sy Borg's link

https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog ... not-random
Step 1, mutation, is random. Mutations don’t arise in order to fill a current “need” of the organism. They are blind and they lack foresight, so they also can’t anticipate future needs. In this sense, they can reasonably be described as random.
They can also be thought of as “random” in the sense that they are not automatically helpful; a new mutation may turn out to be beneficial or harmful or neutral.

Random mutation is needed before natural selection can work. Starting from 3.7 million years ago, there are no organising Hox gene, there are no other genetic organising systems in place. For about three billion years there was not the need for any mutations that would become vertebrae, jaws, fins, rib cages etc, and life is happy.

Can you imagine a trillion Lego bricks in one big heap, and you had to assemble them in the shape of a fish, complete with its skeleton. You can have as many billions of attempts as you like. There are some conditions, a small fish of around a trillion cells would become full size within about a year. This means you would have to assemble the Lego bricks at the rate of about three billion every day, or about a hundred million bricks every hour for a year. And if this was to be done in some kind of random way, you would need a blindfold to make it more realistic.

Natural selection ensures that , over millions of years, only the life forms (their genes)that can live long enough to reproduce themselves can survive the struggle for existence.

Natural selection can only have a meaning if mutation has first created something, Referring back to Sy Borg's link, Mutation Is random.

But, Eric, you surely know that disease germs mutate which is part of the process that results in the germs becoming resistant to certain antibiotics. One -celled organisms mutate. The "Lego bricks" sometimes are cells which mutate.

Mutations of cells is caused by men to happen, and the process is known as artificial engineering , a variety of artificial selection, by which men make use of mutated cells. Mutation of cells also happens randomly i.e. not caused by human intervention. Cancers are caused by natural (random) mutation of cells.There is nothing mysterious about 'random' in the context of cellular mutation ; 'random' means of unknown cause.

[EricPH]

Mutations of cells is caused by men to happen, and the process is known as artificial engineering , a variety of artificial selection, by which men make use of mutated cells.

You are describing mutation using intelligent design.

Mutation of cells also happens randomly i.e. not caused by human intervention. Cancers are caused by natural (random) mutation of cells.There is nothing mysterious about 'random' in the context of cellular mutation.

Here you are describing disease and destruction.

Starting from single cell life, then finding a system that will assemble a trillion cells into vertebrae, ribs, jaws, muscles organs, skin etc requires detailed organisation. This is not the same as cancer cells mutating. Another minor point, cells already existed that could become cancerous. Creating a trillion cell structure from a single cell structure is not the same, even if you have billions of attempts.

'random' means of unknown cause

I like Sy borg's definition of random

Sy Borg's link

https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog
Step 1, mutation, is random. Mutations don’t arise in order to fill a current “need” of the organism. They are blind and they lack foresight, so they also can’t anticipate future needs. In this sense, they can reasonably be described as random.
They can also be thought of as “random” in the sense that they are not automatically helpful; a new mutation may turn out to be beneficial or harmful or neutral.

[EtVelata]

We should really start with abiogenesis here. Even if one does not subscribe to the theory of theism it still remains astounding that life emerged from non-life. This is to say primal matter of various chemical compositions reacting interacting with each other towards self-propogation.

Why did this basic chemicals actually interact with each other in the first place ? This indicates properties and laws of these particles to allow such interactions to happen in a meaningful manner. It also seems to suggest the law of mutual interaction and merging of different atoms to create new atoms or chemistry and chemical reactions.

Without pre-establishing the way matter interacts I.e rules, laws of physics chemistry etc nothing would have emerged, yet it did.

So it seems to me there was some pre-existing properties or laws or rules that say two hydrogen atoms combining with oxygen will create water ? But why, who set these rules in motion for this to happen after all it is easier for no rules to exist rather than complex ones allowing such a combination.

Why upon interacting the two molecules of hydrogen with oxygen produced nothing at all ?

My argument here is the existence of such properties among basic elements that allows such interactions to create different elements…design right ?

[Belindi]

Mutations of cells is caused by men to happen, and the process is known as artificial engineering , a variety of artificial selection, by which men make use of mutated cells.

You are describing mutation using intelligent design.

Mutation of cells also happens randomly i.e. not caused by human intervention. Cancers are caused by natural (random) mutation of cells.There is nothing mysterious about 'random' in the context of cellular mutation.

Here you are describing disease and destruction.

Starting from single cell life, then finding a system that will assemble a trillion cells into vertebrae, ribs, jaws, muscles organs, skin etc requires detailed organisation. This is not the same as cancer cells mutating. Another minor point, cells already existed that could become cancerous. Creating a trillion cell structure from a single cell structure is not the same, even if you have billions of attempts.

'random' means of unknown cause

I like Sy borg's definition of random

Sy Borg's link

https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog
Step 1, mutation, is random. Mutations don’t arise in order to fill a current “need” of the organism. They are blind and they lack foresight, so they also can’t anticipate future needs. In this sense, they can reasonably be described as random.
They can also be thought of as “random” in the sense that they are not automatically helpful; a new mutation may turn out to be beneficial or harmful or neutral.

[/quo

Cells of the same sort of tissue stick together and form specialised organs or different shapes and sizes. Cells of different sorts of tissue can't stick together. Natural selection affects not only cells but also tissues and organs.

[EricPH]

Cells of the same sort of tissue stick together and form specialised organs or different shapes and sizes. Cells of different sorts of tissue can't stick together.

Belindi, it sounds very easy when you say it like that, assembling and sorting a trillion cells in some kind of order is a mammoth task. Sorting a trillion cells into 500 muscles, 200 bones, 500 ligaments and 1000 tendons, each with a unique size and shape. Plus all the organs, skin nerves etc. And at the rate of a hundred million cells every hour for a year.

We know what life looks like today, we had to get here somehow. The biggest challenge for blind mutation is to go from single cell life to life with a trillion plus cells. This probably happens in a time frame of a few hundred million years, but probably less than a billion.

Can you imagine a trillion Lego bricks in one big heap, each with a an individual code, you would have to send a drone high up to take a photo of them.

Natural selection affects not only cells but also tissues and organs.

Random mutation is needed before natural selection can work. Mutation would have to blindly put in a place a system that could organise a hundred million cells per hour. Starting from 3.7 million years ago, there are no organising Hox gene, there are no other genetic organising systems in place. For about three billion years there was not the need for any mutations that would become vertebrae, jaws, fins, rib cages etc, and life is happy.

[Belindi]

Eric wrote:

Belindi, it sounds very easy when you say it like that, assembling and sorting a trillion cells in some kind of order is a mammoth task. Sorting a trillion cells into 500 muscles, 200 bones, 500 ligaments and 1000 tendons, each with a unique size and shape. Plus all the organs, skin nerves etc. And at the rate of a hundred million cells every hour for a year.

Yes nature is marvellous. It's no wonder people are tempted to believe an intelligent being arranged it all.

[EricPH]

Yes nature is marvellous. It's no wonder people are tempted to believe an intelligent being arranged it all.

Gravity has a nice little equation F=Gm1m2 / r2. Very positive and straight to the point.

Evolution on the other hand, hangs and depends on random mutation, by comparison, it seems vague and aimless. Random mutation must happen first, before natural selection can select any advantage.

Sy Borg's link

https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog
Step 1, mutation, is random. Mutations don’t arise in order to fill a current “need” of the organism. They are blind and they lack foresight, so they also can’t anticipate future needs. In this sense, they can reasonably be described as random.
They can also be thought of as “random” in the sense that they are not automatically helpful; a new mutation may turn out to be beneficial or harmful or neutral.

Random mutation is Not a sound argument to base the complexity of a trillion plus cells on. The larger the unit, the chance of error becomes greater.

Intelligent design makes more sense.