Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
User avatar
BardoXV
New Trial Member
Posts: 16
Joined: August 8th, 2016, 10:37 am

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by BardoXV »

LuckyR wrote:
BardoXV wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


"Thought Out" is useless unless it can be applied, and so far the only ones thinking about it are those who produce few or no offspring. The ones producing offspring are those who do not think about it but reproduce without any control at all. The point is that reproduction is not thought out in the industrial nations at all, the majority of reproduction is done without any consideration of the consequences. Breading is mostly to chance as it is, there is little thought being applied to the process.
Wow, speak for yourself... oh wait, I guess you already are! The rest of us consider with whom we breed and how many children we have (and when) in quite some detail.
I've read your previous posts and we are saying the same thing, but it seems that you are not reading or understanding what I am posting. It also seems that you are lumping me with those in the ghettos who are breeding indiscriminately. I am not one of them, but I am aware that they exist, and I don't ignore their existence. I am also aware that those who produce the most offspring, produce the next generation of human beings, and until you can get them to control their numbers, they will take over the world by sheer force of numbers.
User avatar
TSBU
Posts: 151
Joined: August 17th, 2016, 5:32 pm

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by TSBU »

"Humans" is a big word. "Should" is a vague word.

If you talk about things that should happen, you are really talking about how to make them happen (you). About what should you do (the only one you can control). You don't say "should it rain?" if you are not going to think how to make rain.

So, should you make people be responsible about their own evolution?
Now, "their evolution" are vague words. They control "their evolution" already, if that means they control with whom they make babies.
Should you change that?

For me, that's very similar to "should I control other people reproduction?" Sometimes, maybe. I wouldn't blame you if you get angry with your son, and shout Having children is not a game, be carefull! But there isn't a "objective" answer, do as you wish, but don't expect to be the only one who want to gain control over that kind of things, don't espect everybody to have the same thoughts about that (I want control over myself, that's a start).

But if you are talking about your own reproduction, or your own evolution. Well, again, it's your choice, do as you wish.

And... if you are talking about (your, not mine) gen modification etc, it's again your choice. What about me? I would say Why not? choose your plasmid and evolve!
User avatar
Misty
Premium Member
Posts: 5934
Joined: August 10th, 2011, 8:13 pm
Location: United States of America

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by Misty »

TSBU wrote:"Humans" is a big word. "Should" is a vague word.

If you talk about things that should happen, you are really talking about how to make them happen (you). About what should you do (the only one you can control). You don't say "should it rain?" if you are not going to think how to make rain.

So, should you make people be responsible about their own evolution?
Now, "their evolution" are vague words. They control "their evolution" already, if that means they control with whom they make babies.
Should you change that?

But if you are talking about your own reproduction, or your own evolution. Well, again, it's your choice, do as you wish.
It is obvious that since the beginning of time females do not always choose who impregnates them. Also males do not always want to impregnate a female just because
he desires sex. Unintended pregnancies is probably the norm even for married couples.
Then there is rape which causes many pregnancies. It is not a given that ones reproduction is in ones own hands, therefore, nor is their choice/evolution.
Things are not always as they appear; it's a matter of perception.

The eyes can only see what the mind has, is, or will be prepared to comprehend.

I am Lion, hear me ROAR! Meow.
Anthony Edgar
Posts: 150
Joined: July 9th, 2016, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Paula Haigh
Location: Forster NSW Australia

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by Anthony Edgar »

"Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?"

This question presumes evolution is a fact. Since when?
User avatar
ThamiorTheThinker
Posts: 281
Joined: October 21st, 2015, 9:07 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Yoda

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by ThamiorTheThinker »

Anthony Edgar wrote:"Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?"

This question presumes evolution is a fact. Since when?
Evolution IS a fact. We have directly observed the change in phenotypic traits between generations of a species population, and have recorded that change, on multiple occasions.

The THEORY of evolution, that is, Darwin's theory of natural selection, is a theoretical framework to interpret the mechanisms behind and explain WHY evolution happens. The theory he laid out also gives a testable explanation for the idea that some populations of organisms tend to survive and reproduce more efficiently in their environments, and that it's due to those changes which are brought on by evolutionary forces.
User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3117
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by Felix »

The theory he laid out also gives a testable explanation for the idea that some populations of organisms tend to survive and reproduce more efficiently in their environments, and that it's due to those changes which are brought on by evolutionary forces.
That explains adaptation, but not evolution. That is, the simplest organisms adapt best to their environment, so evolution beyond that point is antithetical to survival.
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin
User avatar
ThamiorTheThinker
Posts: 281
Joined: October 21st, 2015, 9:07 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Yoda

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by ThamiorTheThinker »

Felix wrote:
The theory he laid out also gives a testable explanation for the idea that some populations of organisms tend to survive and reproduce more efficiently in their environments, and that it's due to those changes which are brought on by evolutionary forces.
That explains adaptation, but not evolution. That is, the simplest organisms adapt best to their environment, so evolution beyond that point is antithetical to survival.
Yes, but it was a part of Darwin's theory. And what I stated before that is the fact that the other parts of Darwin's theory are meant to explain why evolution happens (what its mechanisms are).
Anthony Edgar
Posts: 150
Joined: July 9th, 2016, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Paula Haigh
Location: Forster NSW Australia

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by Anthony Edgar »

Some folks (mainly atheists) dogmatically insist that it is a "fact" that humans evolved from simpler life forms, starting with a single-cell organism, via a process of speciation. I find it interesting that so many people believe in this "fact" although:
a) speciation at any level of life has never been observed
b) there are no known practical uses for speciation
c) human survival is in no way dependant on believing in the fact" of microbe-to-man evolution.

So why all the fuss over such an irrelevant belief? Is it reasonable to conclude that belief in this "fact" has a lot more to do with justifying an individual's atheistic philosophy than science?
Vijaydevani
Posts: 2116
Joined: March 28th, 2014, 3:13 am

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by Vijaydevani »

Anthony Edgar wrote:Some folks (mainly atheists) dogmatically insist that it is a "fact" that humans evolved from simpler life forms, starting with a single-cell organism, via a process of speciation. I find it interesting that so many people believe in this "fact" although:
a) speciation at any level of life has never been observed
b) there are no known practical uses for speciation
c) human survival is in no way dependant on believing in the fact" of microbe-to-man evolution.

So why all the fuss over such an irrelevant belief? Is it reasonable to conclude that belief in this "fact" has a lot more to do with justifying an individual's atheistic philosophy than science?
blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-su ... ervations/
I just had to google "has speciation been observed". This is the first link I got. I realize from the general tone of your post that you will ignore this as another lie perpetrated by the atheists who want to destroy religion, but I thought it was worth a try.

-- Updated September 25th, 2016, 12:09 pm to add the following --

You also seem to be suggesting that atheists are the only people who "believe" in evolution. ( I find this term bizarre as evolution is not a belief system, but anyway) I am pretty sure there are some theists who study science too and "believe" in evolution. So clubbing evolution as a subset of atheism seems to be just ignorance on your part of the facts. Atheism is and always will be an absence of belief in God. No more and no less. It has nothing to do with believe or lack thereof in anything else whatsoever. This has also been repeated countless times by atheists but some theists just seem to completely ignore this fact. Science is independent of theism and atheism. I wish you would understand at least that much.
A little knowledge is a religious thing.
User avatar
Felix
Posts: 3117
Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by Felix »

Well it depends on how broad your definition of "species" is. It's true that we've never seen complete speciation, i.e., mutation from one type of species to a different one, just variations in existing species, as mentioned in that article you linked to, which is more definite in lower life forms such as plants.

As I mentioned earlier, Darwinian evolution doesn't explain why upwardly mobile evolution should occur, since the simplest life forms can adapt better to their environment than more complex ones. Did they tire of the unicellular dating scene and want something more?
"We do not see things as they are; we see things as we are." - Anaïs Nin
User avatar
Rr6
Posts: 1034
Joined: April 5th, 2015, 2:20 pm
Favorite Philosopher: R. Bucky Fuller

Three Parent Babies In News

Post by Rr6 »

Yes they not should but are responsible.

In the news today is three parent babies.

..."The technique involved removing some of the mother's DNA from an egg, and leaving the disease-causing DNA behind. The healthy DNA was slipped into a donor's egg, which was then fertilized. As a result, the baby inherited DNA from both parents and the egg donor.

....The technique is sometimes said to produce "three-parent babies," but the DNA contribution from the egg donor is very small.

.....People carry DNA in two places, the nucleus of the cell and in features called mitochondria, which lie outside the nucleus. The technique is designed to transfer only DNA of the nucleus to the donor egg, separating it from the mother's disease-causing mitochondrial DNA."....

Of course human evolution is much more than just genetics, but this latter caught my eye today.

r6
"U"niverse > UniVerse > universe > I-verse < you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
Anthony Edgar
Posts: 150
Joined: July 9th, 2016, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Paula Haigh
Location: Forster NSW Australia

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by Anthony Edgar »

Vijaydevani wrote: I just had to google "has speciation been observed". This is the first link I got. I realize from the general tone of your post that you will ignore this as another lie perpetrated by the atheists who want to destroy religion, but I thought it was worth a try.

-- Updated September 25th, 2016, 12:09 pm to add the following --

You also seem to be suggesting that atheists are the only people who "believe" in evolution. ( I find this term bizarre as evolution is not a belief system, but anyway) I am pretty sure there are some theists who study science too and "believe" in evolution. So clubbing evolution as a subset of atheism seems to be just ignorance on your part of the facts. Atheism is and always will be an absence of belief in God. No more and no less. It has nothing to do with believe or lack thereof in anything else whatsoever. This has also been repeated countless times by atheists but some theists just seem to completely ignore this fact. Science is independent of theism and atheism. I wish you would understand at least that much.
For every scientist who claims that speciation has occurred, it almost certain that another scientist somewhere will dispute it.  One step forward and one step back ... so goes the dance of speciation - nowhere, in other words.   

------------------------------------------------------------

There is no doubt that many theists accept evolution as a fact.  As for the Christian variety, those who are accept it are in error, in my opinion, as evolution cannot be reconciled with Scripture.  
The Catholic Church had for centuries generally accepted that the six days of creation mentioned in Genesis were literally six days of 24 hours.  But due to the influence of "science", the 1992 publication of the Catechism of the Catholic Church describes Scripture as presenting the six days "symbolically", thus allowing a "day" to be interpreted as longer than 24 hours (as in, possibly billions of years).
Many influential Catholics (eg, Popes) have deferred to the Church's Pontifical Academy of Sciences for advice on evolution.  The scientists who make up this Academy are not all Catholic by any means, but come from a wide cross-section of humanity - atheists included.  This Academy's views on evolution are no different to the secular scientific establishment - ie, man evolved from a microbe.

The disturbing (and frankly, inexcusable) fact that many Christians accept microbe-man evolution as reality says a lot about their ignorance and stupidity in this matter, and also demonstrates the extent to which the masses have been brainwashed into accepting evolution.  This phenomenon, however, doesn't weaken the claim that microbe-man evolution is essentially an atheist invention.

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it ... It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent."  Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda Minister.  
User avatar
ThamiorTheThinker
Posts: 281
Joined: October 21st, 2015, 9:07 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Yoda

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by ThamiorTheThinker »

Anthony Edgar, I'll remind you, as a moderator of this site, that we do not allow ad hominem remarks. Your comment about "the masses" being brain-washed, comparing atheists to Joseph Goebbels and calling evolution an "atheist invention" come awfully close to an ad hominem argument.

Also, evolution - that is, the change in phenotypic traits between generations of organisms - is literally just a fact. We have directly observed this in certain cricket populations (sources below).

The only debateable thing about evolution is HOW it happens. One might be able to argue against Darwin's theory of natural selection, but his theory of natural selection is only a description of the mechanisms behind evolution. In simple point of fact, we have SEEN evolution happen, we just don't have all the answers as to what lies behind its mechanisms, causes and effects (though Darwin's theory was a fantastic starting point, and serves us to this very day).

Zuk, Marlene, John T. Rotenberry, and Robin M. Tinghitella. "Silent night: adaptive disappearance of a sexual signal in a parasitized population of field crickets." Biology Letters 2.4 (2006): 521-524.

Tinghitella, R. M. "Rapid evolutionary change in a sexual signal: genetic control of the mutation ‘flatwing’ that renders male field crickets (Teleogryllus oceanicus) mute." Heredity 100.3 (2008): 261-267.

Tinghitella, R. M., et al. "Island hopping introduces Polynesian field crickets to novel environments, genetic bottlenecks and rapid evolution." Journal of evolutionary biology 24.6 (2011): 1199-1211.

Pascoal, Sonia, et al. "Rapid convergent evolution in wild crickets." Current Biology 24.12 (2014): 1369-1374.
Anthony Edgar
Posts: 150
Joined: July 9th, 2016, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Paula Haigh
Location: Forster NSW Australia

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by Anthony Edgar »

ThamiorTheThinker wrote:Anthony Edgar, I'll remind you, as a moderator of this site, that we do not allow ad hominem remarks.

Also, evolution - that is, the change in phenotypic traits between generations of organisms - is literally just a fact. We have directly observed this in certain cricket populations (sources below).

The only debateable thing about evolution is HOW it happens.

Your advice regarding ad hominem remarks has been duly noted.

--------------------------------------------------------------

The unobserved, unverified "fact" of microbe-to-man evolution would be worth discussing if it actually had a practical use.  But it doesn't; it's as useless to applied science as a fairy tale.  Which begs the question:  Why is so much emphasis placed on such a useless idea?

On the other hand, the observed, verified fact of changes within a species - for example, producing a sheep dog from a wolf - is eminently useful and thus most worthy of discussion.

Thank you for the cricket experiments sources.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Incidentally, if "The universe is a quantum computer", is this evidence of Intelligent Design?  
User avatar
ThamiorTheThinker
Posts: 281
Joined: October 21st, 2015, 9:07 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Yoda

Re: Should humans be responsible for their own evolution?

Post by ThamiorTheThinker »

Anthony Edgar-

It seems, then, that we're talking about different things. When you said "evolution", I presumed you meant evolution as biology textbooks define the term, that is: change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.

This kind of evolution is a fact - a directly observed and recorded fact (see the sources I shared previously).

Whether microbe-to-human evolution is something you want to deny or support is an entirely different matter than the one I was addressing, and perhaps that is why there was disagreement between us. I was not saying anything about microbe-to-human models of human origins, I was talking merely about evolution as biology textbooks define it - the kind of evolution Darwin developed his natural selection theory to explain.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Science”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021