Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Dojan comments on Evolutions Are Stupid (But Work Anyway) - Less Wrong

34 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 03 November 2007 03:45PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (67)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Dojan 08 October 2011 06:53:55PM *  5 points [-]

If we're not going to give the snake credit for evolving and using its rattle, we can hardly give the engineer much credit for evolving and using her brain.

I'm not giving the snake credit for having a rattle, though if it uses its rattle really well, I might give it credit for that. In the same manner, I would't give the engineer credit for having a brain, but if she uses it really well, I might give her credit for that.

I mean, I'm just doing what my genes tell me to do.

First: It seems to me that the problem you are having with this is all of determinism, not just genes. Second: What is the difference between you and your genes anyway? You are the expression om your genes, it's not like they are a different entity inside you who decides on stuff.

Also: I'm not finding any references to god in this article, except the explicit statements on how this is *not * about creationism or an evolutionary fairy. What am I missing?

I agree with you about transcendence (at least in that definition): When I think enough about certain science and aspects of nature I get this standing-at-the-edge-of-the-cliff feeling, this vertigo about how strange and big and wonderful and terrifying a place we are really inhabiting... Art seldom does this to me though, except perhaps music. But I digress.

[Edit: Spelling]

Comment author: bigjeff5 30 December 2011 10:58:23PM 2 points [-]

Also: I'm not finding any references to god in this article, except the explicit statements on how this is *not * about creationism or an evolutionary fairy. What am I missing?

Eliezer's discussion of evolution as an "alien god". That is, if you absolutely have to have a "god" figure, then evolution itself fits the bill pretty perfectly. Unfortunately for the Judeo-Christian types, it's less Jehovah and more Azathoth (H.P. Lovecraft's god of chaos) in nature. See Alien God.

I think you hit the nail on the head regarding /ehj2.

Comment author: Dojan 31 December 2011 12:25:49AM 0 points [-]

Eliezer's discussion of evolution as an "alien god".

But...That's not... Yeah. If absolutely have to have a "god" figure, then you might as well grossly misinterpret EY's explanation to make it fit your own beliefs.

I think you hit the nail on the head regarding /ehj2.

Thank you! I'm slowly beginning to learn this rationality thing it would seem :-)