"Meaningful" can be replaced with "marketable" and "product superiority" can be equated with "survival of the fittest."
Nonsense. The two processes are nothing alike. Books are not iterated by introducing random and incremental variations in each iteration; indeed, no such mechanism exists either today or in Darwin's day. Further, there is no natural process by which books are selected by reproductive fitness. And the basis of your claim is that Darwin did NOT have grand libraries to study; that the 1830's had no such institutions that he could use as a basis, and he thus could not consider such a thought experiment. That is ludicrous.
There is no law against how and what a publisher can publish. One proposed mechanism has been published. http://everythingimportant.org/genome.pdf
It did not. It is an emergent property of a complex neural network. The complex neural network we call the brain is molded by evolution to be sufficiently complex, adaptive and functional to ensure survival of the organism. In some animals (annelids) that means simple tropisms. In some animals (birds) it means complex behaviors, including management of flight surfaces, complex mating rituals and long range navigation. In humans it means the ability to express very complex skills - language, ability to accept formal education, engineering skills, childrearing, writing. In none of those is consciousness necessary. However, it is has emerged as a consequence of the growing complexity of nervous systems.
Well to have a debate we need to clearly identify what it is we are to debate. Perhaps present the case for whatever it is that you wish to support a little more specific. I tried to reduce your propostion buut thought perhaps you should could rather than us guess maybe. Iam not sure as to your exact point. Alex
I suppose one could study what knowledge survives. There are books and there are books. I guess over time if you tracked a culture over centuries it probably show different vooks being removed for what ever reason. But if you suggest Darwin somehow did a slack job for whatever reason I doubt you can provide a convincing arguement. Would you be capable of presenting such a body of work to present to us whatever proposition you think is reality. Alex
No he wouldn't No it's not OK Now explain to me where two books screw each other One gets pregnant And after gestation a baby booklet is born (sorry I don't know the gestation period of books. It wasn't taught when I did my Nursing Midwifery course) I'm guessing from here Baby book is checked by the Matron Miss Encyclopaedia and given to the proud parents who bill and coo about baby book's fonts and which parent has the closest matching font Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Sorry you are insulting poor halfwits No there is not Arrrrh if only we could remove humans who sprout unrecognizable gibberish As Wolfgang Pauli put it (paraphrase) It's not only faulty it's not even wrong No they can't Yes it is Charles Darwin was intelligent It would not matter as his intelligence enabled him to create his own real science from his observations And if you are using not studying in a great library to demonstrate how terribly illiterate Charles Darwin was in real science I would put you in the "has never even seen a book or ever understood Science" group Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Now I am starting to worry about all the books that have gone extinct and we will never know about them. I think we could research the records and see which books Dawin took out of the library, references as to what he may have read and books of the time an ones that he didnt read. It could be done but the fact is evolution rules if you have a better model beat Dawin but I dont like your chances. Alex
A library could, in principle, be developed this way. Notice, though, that there's a selection mechanism missing from the above description. It's impled right there in the "examine the result to see if the new phrase is meaningful" part, but not specified. Who or what is doing the examining? What does "meaningful" mean in this context? Meaningful to whom? Meaningful for what? This model also assumes that new books are only produced by copying old ones, with occasional mistakes. Nothing wrong with that, although we know that's not how it works in real-world libraries. To summarise: there's nothing inherently absurd about this idea, but there are a lot of important pieces missing from the description of this so-called evolving library. The description given is, of course, completely inadequate for explaining how our real, current, libraries came to be the way they are.
Why would you believe Darwin did not know how books were shelved or printed? He wasn't. And "literacy in science" seems almost useless, as a concept - what would it mean? Not if you want to apply Darwinian evolutionary theory. Library evolution is not Darwinian. So?
Quantum is the new god Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Wonder whoes bright idea it was to pick up the new buzz word and try to run with "we have something scientists cannot explain. Well we can link it to ID" Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You appear to be using yours to confuse other posters Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!