Re: The Theory of Evolution - perfect?
Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 10:24 pm
For the discussion of all things philosophical, especially articles in the magazine Philosophy Now.
Doc, something that just happened that way is random. Euromillions is paradigmatic of a random process as not even people who claim they can foresee future win it (otherwise you never had a Jackpot).
Which individual tickets will win Euromillions cannot be predicted by a ticket buyer in advance. On the other hand, they know how the lottery is conducted, they know that there will be willing tickets and so on, so the lottery is not random in that sense.
I would say the score is not random because it describes the contents of the test-paper. The examiner should be able to explain the marking empirically; the test-paper shows 'X' and the marking scheme says that 'X' is worth one point.When someone get a high score in a school examination, part of it, but not all of it, just happened that way. There was a driving force or whatever you wish to call it. This is a non-random process.
Evolution itself is a theory. It is non-random in the sense that it is a theory about something. Like the examination mark, it is an account of something else; it must correspond to that thing - the 'thing' in this case being the available evidence within natural history and general science.So, evolution is random or non-random? Can you make your point more cogent?
Your examples are fine. If I want to call someone and don't know his mobile number, here I can compose a 9-digit number starting in 9 and try it. I have non-random rules so I won't compose an 8-digit number. But my result will be random anyway and it'll be very hard matching the number I need.
The correct number for the person is not random. You just do not know it. That we do not know something does not make that thing 'random', not as the word is normally understood.PauloL wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:44 am Your examples are fine. If I want to call someone and don't know his mobile number, here I can compose a 9-digit number starting in 9 and try it. I have non-random rules so I won't compose an 8-digit number. But my result will be random anyway and it'll be very hard matching the number I need.
In this case it is slightly different in that the winning number has not yet been determined, but there is going to be one, and as soon as there is then it will determine which is the winning ticket. Again, the fact that you, the ticket buyer, cannot predict this future event does not make it random.Sure, lottery's rules are non-random. That's correct. But that doesn't help get a prize, because winning one is random within lottery's rules. Non-random rules make it random winning a prize. There's no option for non-randomness.
I'm not sure what you are saying here. If I decided; I will answer the questions in this test in a random way, then my answers would be consequential of that decision.Put that way, examination is non-random nevertheless because rules aren't random again, but they allow you to walk non-randomly towards success as the rules tell you what you're expected to do for that. However, if you have a multiple choice examination and don't do what's expected to according to rules, you'll answer it at random, but this is a particular situation. There's an option for non-randomness here.
I'd want to question 'the best fit will survive'. That suggests the lottery, in that there is a winning ticket. But there are differences. Unlike the lottery, there is not necessarily going to be any winning tickets; the usual result is extinction.Of course, in your sense, which is correct to me, evolution isn't random in that the best fit will survive. This is the rule. But that rule doesn't invalidate a probability of 1 in 64 adding the codon that will work on an existing DNA string. There's no option for non-randomness choosing a codon. So, this is likely a lottery, not an examination. Making the best fit is random, isn't that correct?
Euromillions has non-random rules. Filling in a Euromillions can be non-random. Winning it is random. There no choice you can win it non-randomly whatever you do.
There are two usages of the word 'random'.evolution is random or non-random? Can you make your point more cogent?
I think the numbers on the ticket are a distraction. You do not really 'win' it by picking particular numbers. All you do is buy a chance to win. That chance (assuming it isn't rigged) is not random, it is set.
Well strictly speaking, I can't answer an examination question randomly. If my answer was random, it would have no connection to the question. It would not really be 'an answer to an exam question', because it had no relationship to it. In fact, it would not even be an 'answer'. We would rather talk of a 'random response' which could include doing nothing, eating the paper, or not attending the exam. In fact, a truly random response to an exam would be if somebody was not aware there was any exam to respond to.You can answer an examination randomly of course. The point is that you have a choice doing that non-randomly, because you can guess the correct answer from questions (the rules), something you can't in a lottery. The difference is that an option for non-randomness exists in an examination but it doesn't exist in a lottery.
That suggests there is 'nature' which includes things like DNA, and also an agency 'Nature' (capital 'N') which does things to ordinary 'nature'. This is surely misleading.When Nature adds a codon to an existing DNA chain is the concrete codon put there random or not for you?