Personification of evolution

[Kharakov]

Why do so many people, especially the people learned in topics related to biology and related fields persist in explaining why adaptations occur as if nature had a conscious reason?

Hyperactive agency detection:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_detection

The flip side of that is hyperactive agency avoidance, which nobody on this discussion board suffers from. A wolf with flippers might SWIM against the flow.

 

[steve_bnk]

BTW, do you really mean physically raise your eyebrows, or are you just highlighting your feeling in a non literal manner?

haha, I knew I was being metaphorical when being metaphorical. It just doesn't appear sometimes that people realize they are being metaphorical when they are.

'Raising your eyebrows' is not metaphor. It is graphic imagery for emphasis.

In this case you 'fumbled the ball', the common football sports metaphor.

Debating you is like 'shooting fish in a barrel'....

and the leaky barrel you're in is going over Niagra Falls while you happily take pot shots at the fish around you.

Show

You're fishbait on the rocks, sir. Just as you like it.

Don't have a clue what you mean or how it applies to my commentary.

Show

Is Krackpot a Russian name?

 

[Kharakov]

'Raising your eyebrows' is not metaphor. It is graphic imagery for emphasis.

In this case you 'fumbled the ball', the common football sports metaphor.

Debating you is like 'shooting fish in a barrel'....

and the leaky barrel you're in is going over Niagra Falls while you happily take pot shots at the fish around you.

Show

You're fishbait on the rocks, sir. Just as you like it.

Don't have a clue what you mean or how it applies to my commentary.

Show

Is Krackpot a Russian name?

You said "Debating you is like shooting fish in a barrel" 2 Fast. The implication is that you are shooting fish while in a barrel, and that generally is a bad idea if you are floating down the Niagara river toward the falls, not paying attention to the various things going on around you while you shoot fish. Some say "debating you is like shooting fish that are in a barrel", instead of falling for the switch of barrel roles that the equivocation creates, which is generally avoided in actual debait. Fish.

Show

Me Russian? You're the one talking 2 Fast.

 

[Malintent]

Why do so many people, especially the people learned in topics related to biology and related fields persist in explaining why adaptations occur as if nature had a conscious reason?

Hyperactive agency detection:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_detection

The flip side of that is hyperactive agency avoidance

Can you provide a source for information about this term? There are lots of entries on hyperactive agency detection... but nothing on "avoidance". Also, how does one "avoid" what does not present itself? When I walk down the street I can avoid other pedestrians by walking around them. How would I avoid the evil thoughts of the mugger that is hiding in the shadows around the block? One cannot avoid what cannot be seen (or detected, or inferred).

 

[bigfield]

delete - I didn't read to the end of the thread before posting.

 

[Kharakov]

Why do so many people, especially the people learned in topics related to biology and related fields persist in explaining why adaptations occur as if nature had a conscious reason?

Hyperactive agency detection:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_detection

The flip side of that is hyperactive agency avoidance

Can you provide a source for information about this term? There are lots of entries on hyperactive agency detection... but nothing on "avoidance".

You're avoiding the fact (well, at least pretending to avoid the fact) that an "agency" created this term, which is exactly what the term means.

Also, how does one "avoid" what does not present itself? When I walk down the street I can avoid other pedestrians by walking around them. How would I avoid the evil thoughts of the mugger that is hiding in the shadows around the block? One cannot avoid what cannot be seen (or detected, or inferred).

Precisely the way you avoided what the term means (in what you wrote). You make up scenarios that are strawmen in order to avoid acknowledging the agency behind certain acts. It's not like you don't know what the term means- you just avoid acknowledging that you know what it means. In fact, you'd be hard pressed to find the term written about anywhere, for various very humorous reasons.

Show

Note to self: very various sounds better than various very, although Marion Berry sounds better then Mary Baryon, but maybe I've been smokin' the crack.

The term "hyperactive agency avoidance" refers to the hyperactive avoidance of knowledge of the agency behind certain acts.

For example, if I were to engage in agency avoidance in regards to your post

 

[steve_bnk]

'Raising your eyebrows' is not metaphor. It is graphic imagery for emphasis.

In this case you 'fumbled the ball', the common football sports metaphor.

Debating you is like 'shooting fish in a barrel'....

and the leaky barrel you're in is going over Niagra Falls while you happily take pot shots at the fish around you.

Show

You're fishbait on the rocks, sir. Just as you like it.

Don't have a clue what you mean or how it applies to my commentary.

Show

Is Krackpot a Russian name?

You said "Debating you is like shooting fish in a barrel" 2 Fast. The implication is that you are shooting fish while in a barrel, and that generally is a bad idea if you are floating down the Niagara river toward the falls, not paying attention to the various things going on around you while you shoot fish. Some say "debating you is like shooting fish that are in a barrel", instead of falling for the switch of barrel roles that the equivocation creates, which is generally avoided in actual debait. Fish.

Show

Me Russian? You're the one talking 2 Fast.

My position is personification and anthropomorphism are both an essential part of communication. Attempting to restrict discussion to exact literal meanings of words is impossible, the language does not support it.

If you have anything to say on that, by all means proceed.

 

[Malintent]

Why do so many people, especially the people learned in topics related to biology and related fields persist in explaining why adaptations occur as if nature had a conscious reason?

Hyperactive agency detection:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_detection

The flip side of that is hyperactive agency avoidance

Can you provide a source for information about this term? There are lots of entries on hyperactive agency detection... but nothing on "avoidance".

You're avoiding the fact (well, at least pretending to avoid the fact) that an "agency" created this term, which is exactly what the term means.

Also, how does one "avoid" what does not present itself? When I walk down the street I can avoid other pedestrians by walking around them. How would I avoid the evil thoughts of the mugger that is hiding in the shadows around the block? One cannot avoid what cannot be seen (or detected, or inferred).

Precisely the way you avoided what the term means (in what you wrote). You make up scenarios that are strawmen in order to avoid acknowledging the agency behind certain acts. It's not like you don't know what the term means- you just avoid acknowledging that you know what it means. In fact, you'd be hard pressed to find the term written about anywhere, for various very humorous reasons.

Show

Note to self: very various sounds better than various very, although Marion Berry sounds better then Mary Baryon, but maybe I've been smokin' the crack.

The term "hyperactive agency avoidance" refers to the hyperactive avoidance of knowledge of the agency behind certain acts.

For example, if I were to engage in agency avoidance in regards to your post

I don;t understand your response. I asked where the term came from and you replied that I was doing it. If I search for a term and cannot find it used anywhere but in your post, I can only assume you made it up (is that what you meant by me avoiding the agency of the term? how pedantic, if so). If you are just making stuff up as you go along, then just say so.

also, if you could address the other past of my question, I would appreciate it... that is, how does one avoid something that does not present itself? I going out on a ledge here and assume you think there actually is agency in every cuasal event and that everyone else is "avoiding" that agency somehow. Are you willing to explain this?

If you want to know how your car got wet and I (the only other person around) said that I twitched my nose back and forth and made it so.. and you say that it must have been the rain earlier in the day, how would you respond to my assertion that you are just avoiding "agency"?

 

[Kharakov]

My position is personification and anthropomorphism are both an essential part of communication.

The essential part of communication is understanding, being able to come together from a common experience in order to understand what one another are meaning. Which perhaps requires a bit of "personification".

Attempting to restrict discussion to exact literal meanings of words is impossible, the language does not support it.

But certain branches of the grammar nazi military do.

 

[Kharakov]

I don;t understand your response. I asked where the term came from and you replied that I was doing it. If I search for a term and cannot find it used anywhere but in your post, I can only assume you made it up (is that what you meant by me avoiding the agency of the term? how pedantic, if so). If you are just making stuff up as you go along, then just say so.

The term specifically refers to the act of avoiding knowledge of agency behind certain acts. I'm fairly sure you know exactly what it means, and can thus attack it from various angles to see how it holds up.

As to creating the term myself, I might not be using the correct term (I don't know what the correct term is, specifically), but it should be relatively apparent what it means from the context of the conversation (it should be HAAA... hyperactive agency acknowledgment avoidance). I do know that avoiding acknowledging the agency behind certain acts is a trait that certain individuals engage in.

also, if you could address the other past of my question, I would appreciate it... that is, how does one avoid something that does not present itself?

One doesn't have to. It's like when a whole bunch of puppies are attacking one another on top of a bitch, while the bitch does not react. Certain individuals may not react if they do not judge the time appropriate for reaction, or if they do not feel that reaction is necessary.

I going out on a ledge here and assume you think there actually is agency in every cuasal event and that everyone else is "avoiding" that agency somehow. Are you willing to explain this?

Umm, am I willing to explain an idea that you came up with on the fly? I can try- it's not really what I think, but if it's what you think I think...
I don't think EE is avoiding the agency. I also don't think that despite the fact that there is an agency behind an act, that every single product of the act is intentional- there are unintentional by-effects (byproducts) that are understood to occur. This doesn't mean that an agency was not behind their creation, it simply means that their creation was not intentional, nor could it be avoided at the time.

If you want to know how your car got wet and I (the only other person around) said that I twitched my nose back and forth and made it so.. and you say that it must have been the rain earlier in the day, how would you respond to my assertion that you are just avoiding "agency"?

Umm, so only people have agency now? How is that for haaa... seriously, do you seriously think that protons and electrons lack agency?

 

[Malintent]

The term specifically refers to the act of avoiding knowledge of agency behind certain acts. I'm fairly sure you know exactly what it means, and can thus attack it from various angles to see how it holds up.

As to creating the term myself, I might not be using the correct term (I don't know what the correct term is, specifically), but it should be relatively apparent what it means from the context of the conversation (it should be HAAA... hyperactive agency acknowledgment avoidance). I do know that avoiding acknowledging the agency behind certain acts is a trait that certain individuals engage in.

also, if you could address the other past of my question, I would appreciate it... that is, how does one avoid something that does not present itself?

One doesn't have to. It's like when a whole bunch of puppies are attacking one another on top of a bitch, while the bitch does not react. Certain individuals may not react if they do not judge the time appropriate for reaction, or if they do not feel that reaction is necessary.

I going out on a ledge here and assume you think there actually is agency in every cuasal event and that everyone else is "avoiding" that agency somehow. Are you willing to explain this?

Umm, am I willing to explain an idea that you came up with on the fly? I can try- it's not really what I think, but if it's what you think I think...
I don't think EE is avoiding the agency. I also don't think that despite the fact that there is an agency behind an act, that every single product of the act is intentional- there are unintentional by-effects (byproducts) that are understood to occur. This doesn't mean that an agency was not behind their creation, it simply means that their creation was not intentional, nor could it be avoided at the time.

If you want to know how your car got wet and I (the only other person around) said that I twitched my nose back and forth and made it so.. and you say that it must have been the rain earlier in the day, how would you respond to my assertion that you are just avoiding "agency"?

Umm, so only people have agency now? How is that for haaa... seriously, do you seriously think that protons and electrons lack agency?

What I gather from your response is that the term you used was just made up by you to descrbe somethng you THINK occurs, however lack of this term being used anywhere else implies that this does not occur (else there would be a common-enough term to be found for it). Perhpas a term already exists.. such as "Logical Deduction", "Reasonable Expectation", or something similar.
You did not answer the question of how one can "avoid" that which is "invisible". You talked about a pile of puppies instead.
You stated (well, implied) that you beleive that every proton and electron has "agency". How is this not a "Hyperactive [sence of] Agency" on your part. an Agent (let's be honest, the Christian God of [one of the thousands of versions of] the Bible) moves avery atom, molecule, and creates every snowflake, according to your wolrdview. Correct? And further to this, some things just happen by accident, because this Agent lets things just get away from "him"?