Natural selection, my ass (Page 2)
AchillesJaguar: "Achilles, you posted a long line of bs but it proves natural selection works. Any male who has what it takes to get laid is going to perpetuate his genes at the expense of males who don't have the same attributes. THAT is natural selection to a tee."
And it's utterly vacuous. What do you expect: Those who have what it takes to get laid NOT to fare better in the hanky-panky than those who don't?
What you've told us above is like saying "Those athletes who have what it takes to win competitions will win more competitions than those without".
Is is true? Yes. of course. How could it possibly NOT be true? It's a truth of language, like say "all bachelors are unmarried men".
Do we need to get out there and test it, as we normally expect of a respectable scientific theory? Well, I suppose if you were a little dense or a little mad you could conduct door-to-door studies in the hope of finding a bachelor who is married, thus falsifying your theory.
Sir Loin: Keep going Achilles, you're supporting my argument with everything you say but in a roundabout way
AchillesJaguar: I'm not quite sure what your "argument" is: The principle of natural selection (PNS) is in the same semantic boat as other tautological truths such as "all aardvarks are aardvarks"? And we ought to be puffing out our chests with pride?
Are we agreed that PNS is a tautology, thus devoid of any empirical content?
If not, will you please state it in non-circular form?
Sir Loin: Hhhhmmm, Achilles you have a way of generating an argument where none exists. Do you do this on purpose?
Without natural selection a species cannot survive in a changing world, it seems we agree on this so why title your forum with Natural Selection my Ass? This implies you either don't believe in it or your donkey is evolving.
AchillesJaguar: Why can't you just answer a simple question?
Can you state the principle of natural selection in a non-circular form or not?
AchillesJaguar: Maybe you'd benefit from a course in the philosophy of language.
You don't seem to even understand what I'm saying.
Sir Loin: I understand what you're saying, also that you are clouding it with a lot of unnecessary long words to disguise its real meaning. I taught a course in concise writing to first year university students in which I took a full page of bureaucratic writing and asked them to reduce it to one sentence without altering its meaning. Eventually together we reduced it to one word.
I wonder if that original page was written by you, the style is familiar.
AchillesJaguar: So far, your "argument" consists in mindless platitudes and psychoanalysis of my "style".
Do you have anything substantive to offer on the issue of natural selection?
AchillesJaguar: What you COULD do to impress me is twofold:
1. Explain in your own words what I (and many others) believe to be the problem with natural selection. Just to show me you even understand the issue at hand.
2. Explain to me why I'm wrong.
Sir Loin: Seems you haven't understood what I'm saying. I haven't said you're wrong, I'm saying we agree on natural selection. The title of this particular forum is at odds with the content, so why bother?
AchillesJaguar: So do you agree or not that the principle (or theory, or whatever you want to call it) of natural selection is utterly devoid of empirical content?
Sir Loin: I don't deal in synthetic statements, I teach critical thinking so I deal in common sense. Unfortunately it's not common at all.
Natural selection is just plain common sense
AchillesJaguar: Dude, if it wasn't obvious to begin with, it's now just silly: You haven't the faintest idea what I'm talking about.
Sir Loin: I understand that you're using your language skills to aggrandise yourself and be a prick. Is that enough?
AchillesJaguar: You came in here like a pompous ass, clearly without the vaguest understanding of the issue.
I call your bluff, and you get all pouty.
You'd better watch out, Santa is watching.
AchillesJaguar: Take this for example...
"I don't deal in synthetic statements".
So you go through your days saying nothing but things like "all aardvarks are aardvarks"?