Stephen Pinker and Adam Gopnik - How Far Can Darwin Take Us? - LIVE Shorts

http://www.nypl.org/live

"How Far Can Darwin Take Us?" Adama Gopnik in Conversation with Steven Pinker, LIVE from the NYPL, May 20, 2009.

Adam Gopnik, author of "Angels & Ages," "A Short Book About Darwin," "Lincoln and Modern Life" and Steven Pinker, author of "The Blank Slate" and many other works, discuss a fundamental question: How far can Darwin take us as a guide to why we are the way we are? Both outspoken appreciators of Darwin, Adam Gopnik and Steven Pinker compare their visions—perhaps complementary, perhaps contrasting—of what Darwin's legacy is, on the two hundredth anniversary of Darwin's birth.


Filming & Editing: The A/V Gang
Audio: One Dream Sound

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• charles darwin
• evolution
• steven pinker
• adam gopnik
• the new yorker
• NYPL
• New York Public Library
• LIVE from the NYPL
• LIVE Shorts

[tcorp]

@Mr88playmaker You're confusing results of emergence with purpose. It's just not how the laws of physics work I'm afraid. I also notice you're having trouble comprehending the time scales involved in abiogenesis and the progression of complexity. Furthermore, simply because we can gather accumulated data and information from nature, doesn't mean the data or information was implanted by an alien intelligence. Natural processes suffice on their own for the emergence and continuation of complexity.

[Mr88playmaker]

@tcorp (QUOTE)" there is no intelligence in DNA patterns." )END QUOTE)

Those "patterns" you speak of are INFORMATION i.e. the communication of knowledge or intelligence.

Try getting a "pattern" from your couch cushions to serve as blueprint language instructions for the creation and governance of biological life forms. It aint gonna happen. Language has rules and information is neither matter nor energy.

Moreover, both language and information arise only from a MIND.

I said info, not data.

[tcorp]

@Mr88playmaker You're assuming there's intelligence in DNA. I don't exactly know where you take this assumption from, but if you had any understanding of chemistry, biology or genetics you would know that there is no intelligence in DNA patterns. Complexity does not require any intelligence. You can look at sand dunes and conclude their geometry is complex, but it's just wind blowing on sand. Natural processes spring forth complexity. I'm afraid your view of genetics isn't very unscientific.

[Mr88playmaker]

@tcorp (QUOTE): "Science and education has progressed quit a bit since you left this side of the pond." (END QUOTE)

Your "science" and "education" has not made you any wiser and I'll prove it.

There are only two options. Pick one!

Either:

(1) Intelligence arises from an INTELLIGENT source

OR

(2) INTELLIGENCE arises from a NON-Intelligent source.

Atheists are illogical. You're disqualified from all things logic and logical.

You can NOT logically defend you position; whereas, I CAN mine!

[tcorp]

@Mr88playmaker Gods? I'm sorry, I live in Europe. Most of us gave up believing in gods and goblins as operators in the world many centuries ago. Science and education has progressed quit a bit since you left this side of the pond. Hopefully, one day your education standards will follow suit. For example, geocentricism was defeated a long time ago here. Do you still hold the religious belief that the sun revolves around the Earth over there? Also, where do you stand on curses and witchcraft?

[Mr88playmaker]

Within the scientific community, no one will place himself on record to state, as his official scientific position, that code is not code or that information is not information. It would be ridiculous and can not be published UNLESS he could prove what he means. There's a lot of irrelevant "mere suggestions" floating around on atheists sites about how DNA directions / instructions are "abstract" thinga-majigs that constitute as matter (not information) but it flies in the face of all science

[Mr88playmaker]

@tcorp

You're mistaken. I understand the social and political implications surrounding the fact that information is neither matter nor energy; and how that fact strikes against what atheists are trying to show (that there's no God). However, when it comes to science, it is every thinking man's duty to accept the scientific facts as they are. No atheist scientist has refuted the facts I've shared with you. Many do double-talk about redefining terms in irrelevant venues but not OFFICIALLY.

[tcorp]

@Mr88playmaker With DNA, the information IS the medium. It's nothing more than a molecular chain. What you consider information is simply the oder or combinations of amino acids as they have accumulated through time by the natural selection of their consequences. It's really not that hard to understand.

[Mr88playmaker]

@tcorp

DNA code and DNA molecule are not the same thing.

Information and medium are not the same thing.

If I call you on the phone to inform you that you've won the lottery, the INFORMATION is not the telephone. Same as the information I am communicating to you now. The information I am communicating to you here is NOT your computer monitor nor this web site. I could transmit the same info via 100 different mediums. So it is with DNA information. They're now making man made DNA-computers!

[tcorp]

@Mr88playmaker Dude. DNA is just a self-replicating molecule that emerged naturally as a result of organic chemistry. Any degree of complexity it may have is because of natural processes and not intelligent magic. Get over your anthropocentrism and smell the coffee.