Design Disquisitions: Critic’s Corner-Sahotra Sarkar

_{Joshua Gidney

August 22, 2017

Biology, Darwinism, Evolution, Evolutionary biology, Food for thought, Intelligent Design, Philosophy, Science}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

My latest ‘Critic’s Corner’ post is now up. This one features the work of ID critic Sahotra Sarkar. Sarkar is one of the more sophisticated critics of ID so his work is worth engaging with. I have responded to some of his arguments in a previous post and plan to do more in the future:

Critic’s Corner: Sahotra Sarkar

Comments

Thanks Dionisio! More will be up shortly :)Joshua G_{August 22, 2017
August
08
Aug
22
22
2017
04:00 PM
4
04
00
PM
PDT}

This was posted in another thread, but maybe it fits in this one too.
Are they referring to the embedded variability framework (EVF) that operates within the biological systems? Don’t birds remain birds? Bacteria remain bacteria? Plants remain plants? Amphibians remain amphibians? Apes remain apes? Humans remain humans? Many ethnic groups but all equally humans. The evo-devo fundamental conundrum remains unresolved: Dev(d) = Dev(a) + Delta(a,d) That’s the bottom line. The rest is speculation. Without Delta(a,d) there’s no way to get Dev(d) from Dev(a). That’s daydreaming illusion. Figment in their imagination. Pie pie in the sky. It’s time to get serious. A couple of years ago a science professor claimed to know exactly how morphogen gradients form, but even today the research papers point to the complexity of such an important process that still is poorly understood. As outstanding questions get answered new ones are raised. However, as every new discovery sheds more light on the elaborate cellular and molecular choreographies orchestrated within the biological systems, the emerging big picture points more and more to marvelously designed systems.
BTW, 'a' stands for 'ancestor' and 'd' for 'descendant'. Dev(x) is the entire developmental process of a given biological system 'x'. Delta(x,y) is the entire set of spatiotemporal changes required in Dev(x) in order to get Dev(y). All the bells and whistles have to be included. The whole enchilada. The point is to show how to get Delta(x,y) assuming that we know Dev(x) and Dev(y). I challenge that professor and his cousins to show me one example that satisfies the above formulation. We can sweep and mop the floor with all their baseless ideas. With every new discovery their situation will get even worse.Dionisio_{August 22, 2017
August
08
Aug
22
22
2017
01:48 PM
1
01
48
PM
PDT}

Joshua G, You have quite an interesting collection of articles in your website. Thank you for sharing it.Dionisio_{August 22, 2017
August
08
Aug
22
22
2017
01:31 PM
1
01
31
PM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply