UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2013 > Feb > Feb 19

Re: Artificial Intelligence

From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul>
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:46:15 -0000
Archived: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 10:07:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Artificial Intelligence

>From: John Donaldson <john.donaldson.nul>
>To: "post.nul" <post.nul>
>Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:26:11 +0000
>Subject: Re: Artificial Intelligence

>>From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul>
>>To: <post.nul>
>>Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 17:48:59 -0000
>>Subject: Re: Artificial Intelligence

>>>From: John Donaldson <John.Donaldson.nul>
>>>To: "post.nul" <post.nul>
>>>Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 16:09:27 +0000
>>>Subject: Re: Artificial Intelligence

>>>>From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul>
>>>>To: <post.nul>
>>>>Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 15:17:59 -0000
>>>>Subject: Re: Artificial Intelligence


>>>>Nope, as you can see my position is that 'morality' +/or
>>>>'ethics' are evolutionary outcomes which have developed
>>>>(because they work) to increase a species chances of
>>>>survival. It's as simple as that.


>Again, without addressing the specific arguments of moral
>realists, to point to evolutionary explanations for the fixation
>of moral behavioural traits in the human population simply
>doesn't address the point at issue.

Hello John,

First - apologies for delay: computer crash followed by faulty
phone lines (+ water mains) meant being off-line for nearly a
month (very restful, got some reading done).

I can understand your objections, yet certain problems are of
such scales (time, distance etc - like the question of the size
and age of the universe), that Popperian 'falsifiability' - see
www.perceptions.couk.com/real-popper.txt cannot be applied to
them just now, so we can only examine the viability of suggested

E.g. - it now seems that classical Darwinian evolution is
non-viable - see:


i.e. that Darwin's rather primitive and conformist 'mechanisms'


couldn't have worked in the time available.

However a deeper examination - by Wallace - suggests that more
complex interactions are taking place, giving almost metaphysical

'Deeper' because, IMHO, Wallace was a more thoroughgoing
scientist, collecting zoological and anthropological evidence
word-wide for many years. As a result Wallace's evolution is a
richer theory and seems to better fit the evidence, see

In addition he wasn't afraid to think outside of conformist
boxes and to follow his logic to arrive at a rather startling
conclusion: "we must therefore admit the possibility that, if we
are not the highest intelligences in the universe, some higher
intelligence may have directed the process by which the human
race was developed, by means of more subtle agencies than we are
acquainted with".

[By 'more subtle agencies' he meant as yet undiscovered sciences
of the future.]

You might think that my position (above) is merely a development
of Wallace's main evolutionary idea, and that's true in a way
yet it was arrived at independently, before I'd read his stuff.


Ray D

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



These contents above are copyright of the author and
UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced
without the express permission of both parties and
are intended for educational use only.

[ Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com