Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Should God be replaced? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (23746)	5/31/2006 1:06:03 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28931

<Surely you don't think that these bacteria are making a conscience decision to increase their mutation rate.> Firstly I'm speaking to the original assertion: <<They either already have something that will do, or they die. >> Message 22498158 < This is nothing more than sex in an organism that doesn't have specialized sexual organs>> But there is no offspring... the bacteria gets code from outside itself... it doesn't 'have the code' as you're saying: [<<They either already have something that will do, or they die.>> <I'm not sure whether this is about biology or evolution in general. In general, evolution is the change that information undergoes under the pressure of selections.> I think they intersect. As to the bacterial making a "conscious decision", that is why I've used the vague "consciouness/awareness/intelligence" thinggy throughout. I don't know that anyone knows exactly what's happening. It seems clear to me that there is LOTS of evidence showing that "random evolution" is going to become a thing of the past. And there is certainly a lot of scrambling around trying to incorporate at least 'consciouness' or 'awareness' into various theories... from physics to biology... as well as, as you say on their own: ""It's valid to explore, for example, the evolution of ideas."" For instance, is this separate from biological evolution?? DAK