Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

FYI/FTR: What is “Monism”?

This is just a note for record on what monism is (as opposed to dualism, Creation by a Supreme and maximally great and good being, etc). A useful point of departure is a diagram from Wikipedia on dualism (and they give only one type) vs monism: Wikipedia notes, next to this: Different types of monism include:[12][18] Substance monism, “the view that the apparent plurality of substances is due to different states or appearances of a single substance”[12] Attributive monism, “the view that whatever the number of substances, they are of a single ultimate kind”[12] Partial monism, “within a given realm of being (however many there may be) there is only one substance”[12] Existence monism, “the view that there is only Read More ›

Talk about convergent evolution: Lizards evolved for life in trees at least 100 times

Toepads don't evolve until after lizards get into the trees, not before. And padless lizards will leave trees at a high frequency -- much higher than padbearing lizards. Okay, now here’s a question: How, exactly, does the tree lizard “evolve” toe pads just because they would be convenient? It’s not self-evident. Many lizards did not but others did. As Michael Behe would ask, “How, exactly?” Read More ›

The 3n + 1/ n/2 conjecture

Here is an example of how numbers can give us hard puzzles: The obvious point, for the naturals is that 3n + 1 converts an odd to an even and division by two pulls out an odd factor or else gets into the chain of powers of two, which has precisely one odd member, 1. Where, of course, conveniently, 3 * 1 + 1 is 4. Thus the halting loop. (The negatives bring in other loops on their side of zero.) So, the [pseudo-?]algorithm — does it always halt? — is searching for the ladder of powers of 2. Find it and you halt, fail and you explode into a halting fail. Or, is there another loop in the positive Read More ›

Why is an elaborate system for keeping populations in check supposed to be “evolutionary chaos”?

The caterpillar-wasp-virus predation system is complex but there is no reason to think it is chaos. It’s just more complex than humans might have expected it to be and perhaps more complex than we could design. Read More ›

Jordan Peterson interviews Larry Krauss on scientism

Krauss’s claims — it’s not just possible but “quite likely” that our universe arose from nothing, “no space, no time, and maybe no laws.” At the least, we can say confidently that it has all the properties we would expect to observe in a 14-billion-year-old universe that came into being “spontaneously, without any supernatural shenanigans.” — are clearly ridiculous. “Nothing” is not an account of anything and there is no way we could know what a universe from nothing “should” look like. Peterson is being too kind here. Read More ›

At Mind Matters News: Why animals can count but can’t do math

There is a current conflict among researchers as to whether our number sense is biological or cultural (nature or nurture). But the conflict appears to miss the point: Elaborate number sense depends on the ability to abstract. If that ability is biological, where exactly is it? If it is cultural, it is an iteration of the ability to abstract. Read More ›

L & FP, 49-i: The Reichstag Fire-panic lesson on agit prop and lawfare

Vivid recently reminded us of the painful, bloody lesson of history taught by Hitler’s seizure of power in 1933. I responded, noting: [I]sn’t it interesting that the Reichstag Fire crisis isn’t a standard part of our general education package. It almost makes one wonder why it is that the story of how the most universally acknowledged unmitigatedly evil dictator seized absolute power through agit prop and lawfare is somehow pushed to the margins of our common fund of knowledge. Not quite a conspiracy of silencing but at least a common evasion of plain duty by those who inform and educate us. Ironically, on a topic where learning this is vital to defending our civilisation, the common thought association fed by Read More ›

Researchers: Giraffes turn out to be a complex social species

Zoe Muller is right to wonder why researchers simply assumed that the giraffe lacked the wit for social skills without having studied the species much. It would be interesting to know if “evolutionary” assumptions underlay that view. Generally, such assumptions should be treated with caution. For example, “evolutionary” assumptions would not prompt researchers to believe that octopuses are as intelligent as they are. Read More ›