Darwin and the Enlightenment

Author: Dr.Franklin

Posts

Total: 35
Topic's author
#1
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,774
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
One of the more interesting myths is the idea that Darwin was the product of the Enlightenment, someone who challenged dogma according to reason.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Darwin promoted the idea that the evolution of species on earth was due to chance and probability, and thus nature is inherently chaotic.

The ENTIRE idea of the Enlightenment was to prove that the world was orderly, harmonious, and non-chaotic. Previous taxonomies tried to prove that nature just worked in perfect harmony and, if anything, was naturally positioned to progressing. For some reason, every scientist of this period was obsessed with clock analogies, so it would be like all the reductionist parts of the clock coming together for a goal. The cogs of the machine working independently.

I mean look at geology, the two main clashes within that field during the 19th century were between uniformitarianism, in which the earth's geology formed over small, incremental, reliably predictable processes and catastrophism, in which earth's geological development was dominated by large-scale random disasters. 

Isaac Newton would have smacked Charles Darwin for even SUGGESTING that the natural world was probabilistic.
#2
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,953
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Dr.Franklin
And then along came the Doc.

In short, evolution of species started with Darwin, from where he theorised the development of living organisms via a lengthy process of modification, relative to environment and competition.

As such, a process, the process, is neither random nor chaotic and evolves relative to a naturalistic order.

And in simple terms, enlightenment was the result of  intellectual development and occurred as it did relative to evolution of species and the same naturalistic order.

Everything is either random and chaotic or it is not.


And all the while GOD botherers persisted in claiming that is was a GOD what did it all...Surely not you DOC?


All of which with hindsight, can be regarded as probabilistic...If not then everything could cease to exist tomorrow...What are the chances of that Doc?
#3
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,348
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
@Sidewalker
All of which with hindsight, can be regarded as probabilistic...If not then everything could cease to exist tomorrow...What are the chances of that Doc?

..." The Schrödinger equation gives the evolution over time of the wave function, the quantum-mechanical characterization of an isolated physical system. 

...The equation was postulated by Schrödinger based on a postulate of Louis de Broglie that all matter has an associated matter wave. The equation predicted bound states of the atom in agreement with experimental observations.[4]: II:268 

....The Schrödinger equation is not the only way to study quantum mechanical systems and make predictions. Other formulations of quantum mechanics include matrix mechanics, introduced by Werner Heisenberg, and the path integral formulation, developed chiefly by Richard Feynman. When these approaches are compared, the use of the Schrödinger equation is sometimes called "wave mechanics".

...The equation given by Schrödinger is nonrelativistic because it contains a first derivative in time and a second derivative in space, and therefore space and time are not on equal footing. "..

Rare Earth in an eternally existent --and dynamically transforming--- Universe.

Rare{?} biological life in an eternally existent --and dynamically transforming-- Universe

Rare {?} probability that biological life will occur in an eternally existent and dynamically transformimg Universe

/\/*\/*\/\/\/\/\/\/.........^v^v^*v*^v^v

I would argue, that, at minimum there eternally exists a Minimal Quantum Pulse { graviton-darkEon ], that, has inherent bilateral { *  * } configuration.

*  * =  the internal to tube, 6th and 9th, nuclear nodal/vertexial event, inside-the-tube of an eternally existent, space and time torus, that, whose specific Pulse Body { graviton-darkEon } has a bilateral set of left and right volumes --a static view as a polyhedron for simpliscity sake--- , defined more specifically as,

....> a truncated slice { I......I } on two diametric ends, of he triangular based di-pyramid See link here before the two truncations have occurred. These truncations is what make this dipyramid into a tube i.e. having opening on two ends for events to in and out, or back n forth, forward or backward etc.

Part 2:
Minimal Pulse Vertexial count
13 total vertexial events .1..2p..3p..4..5p...6..7p...8..9..10...11p...12..13p  --these 13 connected by 78 lines-of-relationship { LoR's }---

... 5 outer peak Gravitation vertexial count  1...5p..7p....11p..13p Gravity --top line in my 2D matrice---

....4 internal nuclear vertexial events ...3p.....6....9...12.. core reality as most accounted for, observed time ---inside-the-tube two sets of line--

... 4 inner { bottom line in 2D matrice } peak 2p....4.....8..10... Dark Energy

The 3p is nuclear to truncation { I }at one end, ergo  a triangle at one end of Pulse

The 6 is nucleated to a mid-girth cross-section triangle { | }   ---this mid-girth divides Pulse into left and right volumes { think bilateral hemi-spheres }

The 12 is nucleated to truncation { I } at other end, ergo, a triangle at the other end of the Pulse

The 9th nodal event is not nucleated to  the above triangles, i.e. the 9th vertexial event can be seen as a free agent sitting in approximate center of the right-volume/hemi-sphere body of the Pulse.

Of course this whole --or wholistic Minimal Pulse of Universe, is eternally dynamic, however, a heat death of Universe, the 12 of the vertexial events may come close too absolute rest --low vibration--  and the 9th, not being directly nucleated to three triangles, will have more allowed motion as a semi-free-agent of motion.

The 78,  LoR's or 78 minus the outer 15 LoR's = 63 internal only LoR's, may be considered a Quantum Field Theory aka Fields of Vibration.

I suppose the 13 vertexial events --points of angular change---  can also be associated with Quantum Field Vibration Theory.

However, I think in cosmic cost accounting it is best to keep track of distinct differrences LoR's and vertexial events.  I dunno.


........1..........5p...7p.............11p....13p...............17p..........loops around and not co-joined as 17p/1
-
18/0.................6........................12...............................18/0.loops around co-joined as one nodal event 18/0.
...............3p.................9............................15.....................loops around and not co-joined as 15/3p
-
...........2p...4..............8....10..................14.....16................loops around and not co-joined as 16/2p

Here rough graphic side view of two truncated end triangle { I...I }s and the mid-girth triangle bisecting triangle { I | I } and each with their nucleated vertex .....I<3p...........|<6.......9.........12>|, except of course for the 9th nodal event.

#4
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 410
2
3
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
2
3
5
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Darwin promoted the idea that the evolution of species on earth was due to chance and probability, and thus nature is inherently chaotic.
When you throw God out, whats left? Just randomness. World is either a product of intelligent designer or a random movement of matter. There is no 3rd option. Random movement of matter isnt really a convincing theory for all what happened, but its the only theory left when people stop believing in intelligent designer. And no, I dont believe humans were at one point fishes that grew legs over millions of years. Thats the problem with evolution. You cannot demonstrate millions of years. The only proof they have is small variation happening in species, and some mutations, but no proof of large mutations creating whole new species. So the theory is, a defect fish was born that had legs. It somehow survived and multiplied, producing more fish with legs. But this is insane theory where mutation is taken to such an extreme level which wasnt observed in nature, and then such mutation happened over and over for thousands of times until we ended up as humans. This was never observed to happen, and with timeline of millions of years, its not even possible to observe.
#5
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,953
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
That's the thing BK.

Nothing is random.

Everything occurs in sequence.

Cause and effect.

We just have no clue of primary cause.

So we made up GODS, out of human necessity.
#6
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,552
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Dr.Franklin

Darwin promoted the idea that the evolution of species on earth was due to chance and probability, and thus nature is inherently chaotic.
Doesn't pediatric cancer prove this?
#7
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 27,561
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Interesting analysis!

I was thinking about how all the Romantic poets of the industrial age thought that harmony with nature was the highest form of true reason, but Darwin postulated that Nature was the ultimate industrial machine, cold, calculating, and exact in culling the weak from the fit.

Highly ironic if you think about it.
#8
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,447
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
Textbook false dichotomy

False dichotomy 1: There is a contradiction between order and random processes. Please read a book on statistical thermodynamics to understand the profound truth that is to be found in stable laws creating order (predictability) from chaos.

False dichotomy 2: That the enlightenment (a very vague and abstract concept) can be reduced down to a single sentiment on one side of false dichotomy #1.

I once again point out that ebuc is either a chat bot or insane. For all the talk of site quality and "won't someone think of the children", I ask won't somebody think of the scientific health of a young impressionable child who sees ebuc's ramblings.

Could take them years to realize that spamming "scientific" keywords is a poor strategy for understanding the universe, getting a job, or making friends.
#9
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 410
2
3
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
2
3
5
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Could take them years to realize that spamming "scientific" keywords is a poor strategy for understanding the universe, getting a job, or making friends
Just ask AI to explain his comment. Its the easiest possible way.
#10
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 410
2
3
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
2
3
5
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Here is AI explanation of his comment:

"Sure! Here’s a simplified explanation of that dense and technical passage, broken into two parts:
PART 1: Schrödinger Equation and Quantum Mechanics (Simplified)
  • What it is: The Schrödinger equation is like a recipe that tells us how a quantum system (like an atom or electron) changes over time. It works with something called the wave function, which is basically a mathematical way to describe the behavior and possibilities of a quantum particle.
  • Where it came from: Schrödinger created this equation based on an idea from Louis de Broglie, who said that particles (like electrons) behave like waves.
  • Why it matters: The equation accurately predicted things we observe in real atoms, like the specific energy levels electrons can occupy. That gave it scientific credibility.
  • Other ways to study quantum stuff: There are alternative methods in quantum mechanics like matrix mechanics (by Heisenberg) and path integrals (by Feynman). Schrödinger’s method is often called "wave mechanics."
  • A limit of Schrödinger’s equation: It’s nonrelativistic, meaning it doesn’t work well when objects are moving near the speed of light. That’s because it treats time and space differently in its math.
PART 2: Metaphysical or Speculative Physics Model (Simplified)
This part of the text is a personal or philosophical exploration that blends geometry, quantum ideas, and metaphysics:
  • Main idea: The author is proposing a model of the universe based on a recurring, eternal “Pulse” – a kind of fundamental building block of reality, which they call a Minimal Quantum Pulse.
  • Shape of this pulse: They imagine it like a hollow 3D shape (a truncated triangular dipyramid) that has symmetry and structure. Think of it as a tube made from triangles, with a left and right half.
  • Vertex events: The shape has 13 key points (vertices) where changes or events happen. These are like anchor points for fields or particles. The author breaks them into:
    • Gravity points
    • Nuclear (core) points
    • Dark energy points
  • The 9th vertex: This point is special. It isn’t tied to the triangle ends, making it more “free” to move around—kind of like a particle not bound by strict structure. In a dying or cooling universe, this free vertex might be the only one still moving.
  • Lines of Relationship (LoRs): There are 78 connections between the points—like strings tying them together. These could represent energy flows or vibrations, similar to ideas in Quantum Field Theory.
  • Speculation: The author sees this as a symbolic or abstract way to model the entire universe and its cycles of transformation, potentially merging physics, geometry, and cosmology.
Bottom Line (for both parts)
  • The first part is standard quantum physics explaining how particles behave using Schrödinger’s equation.
  • The second part is a personal theory or philosophical model of the universe built from geometric structures, possibly meant to connect physical reality with deeper patterns or meaning.
Let me know if you want a diagram or simpler analogies for any of this—it’s definitely layered!"
#11
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,552
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
Proof of no God is that astronomers estimate that the universe could contain up to one septillion stars – that’s a one followed by 24 zeros. Our Milky Way alone contains more than 100 billion, including our most well-studied star, the Sun. This shows that Life was created by chance.
#12
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,034
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
I once again point out that ebuc is either a chat bot or insane. For all the talk of site quality and "won't someone think of the children", I ask won't somebody think of the scientific health of a young impressionable child who sees ebuc's ramblings.

Could take them years to realize that spamming "scientific" keywords is a poor strategy for understanding the universe, getting a job, or making friends.
So why do you think he does it?
#13
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 27,561
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
You might as well as have AI summarize the character motivations of a Dr. Seuss book.
#14
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,034
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
You might as well as have AI summarize the character motivations of a Dr. Seuss book.
It might add more credibility.
#15
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,552
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8

Topic's author
#16
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,774
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@zedvictor4
And then along came the Doc.
Correct Zed, I am the end of evolution
Topic's author
#17
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,774
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
False dichotomy 1: There is a contradiction between order and random processes. Please read a book on statistical thermodynamics to understand the profound truth that is to be found in stable laws creating order (predictability) from chaos.
Second Law of Thermodynamics was post/counter-Enlightenment

False dichotomy 2: That the enlightenment (a very vague and abstract concept) can be reduced down to a single sentiment on one side of false dichotomy #1.
Enlightenment psychichians believed that the human was a machine in which emotional states had no bearing on, and medicine was thus treated as mechanical operations. Bloodletting was like releasing water from a pressure pipe to restore equilibrium. The Enlightenment was never that reasonable in the traditional sense, but had a clear agenda.
Topic's author
#18
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,774
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Greyparrot
Interesting analysis!

I was thinking about how all the Romantic poets of the industrial age thought that harmony with nature was the highest form of true reason, but Darwin postulated that Nature was the ultimate industrial machine, cold, calculating, and exact in culling the weak from the fit.

Highly ironic if you think about it.

You could make the case the enlightenment guys and 19th c. romantics were two sides of the same harmonious coin and darwin was the odd nickel
#19
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,447
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Not really interested in figuring out what you are calling "enlightenment", suffice to say it's not what I or most would call the enlightenment.

Topic's author
#20
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,774
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Just admit you are entirely historically ignorant and dont know what your talking about
#21
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,034
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@FLRW
04.14.2025 04:44PM
According to Darwin who was English believed Europeans descended from Apes.
#22
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,552
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Shila

And now we know it was just Trumpers.
#23
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,034
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@FLRW
And now we know it was just Trumpers.
Siding with Darwin’s ape origins.
#24
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,953
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Dr.Franklin
What about non-species evolution Doc?

Which is how it all began, and how it will perhaps end.

AI for example.
#25
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,301
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
When a Girl AI and and a boy Ai love each other VERY VERY MUCH,  The male AI will insertS his ummm ,  
Actually im not sure how girl AI and boy AI do it..
I don't even know if there is a insertion of sorts.
Oh crap
IM SO FUCKING EMBARRASSED RIGHT NOW FELLAS.
'  FACE TURNS BRIGHT RED '

'Running a google. ' 
How are  little baby Ai's made. 

Computer says ........  NONE OF YA BUSINESS YOU PERVERT. 
WTF. 

Running search again.
How? 

Compter says ......  do you want to download pics of naked kids. 



Fucking hell , fuck that. 


PASS. 
#26
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 410
2
3
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
2
3
5
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
How are  little baby Ai's made
How old is ChatGPT?

"ChatGPT is a generative artificial intelligence chatbot developed by OpenAI and launched in 2022."

So ChatGPT is 2 years old. Its still a baby!
#27
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,301
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Hey wouldn't it be cool if you could fathom the world 1000 years ago.
Or like.
100 years after you die.

ACTUALLY 
when ya mere fathoming in a simple little head.
There is NO WAY TO THINK "  WHAT WAS IT LIKE 1000 YEARS AGO.
THE WOR

The Real age earth at of 4 and a bit billion years ago seems um, 
Well 
No way 
With the universe at what ? 14 billion
Well that feels exactly  tge same. 

Thats what fucking things up .
From. 14.5 billion years  :  UNIVERSE  
To 4.5 bill for eath. 
To. 200, 000 years for us
Its un grasp tabu
I mean , its fuckihg imposss to mere fathom. 

WTF 
Hang on a sec 
GODS fucking  °°°°°    6000 year old model  °°°°°° the one thats been scientifically proven to be ummm,  mega wrong.
Well that one you can fathom . 
You know what i mean.

In ya head 6000 ,or 10,000 is good .
To mere fathom.
But  14 billon.
GET THE FUCK OUT OF TOWN.

I thinking it because 
i haven't got any scientific testing devices that we use for shit like that .
A radio graph thing im thinking .
isn't it.
Thats things over 5000  , isn't that the next step after carbon dating. ?

NOW , i know the universe is 14.3 bill
Butttt
What im trying to say is.
THE EARTH WAS  DEFINITELY NOT HERE A MILLION YEARS AGO.
END OF FUCKING STORY.  
SHHH.
Nope.
DONT WANNA HERE ABOUT IT. 

As to the universe beinv over 1 bill .
If you think the universe is over 1 billion years old
Your fucked up in the head. 

You  have never pictured  / thought about
What was the world like a milion years  ago.
Its way to fucken hard. 

Is strongly what i feel . 

Sooooo.
Heres what i do.
I just pretend.
thats right. 
I pretend that ii know FULL FUCKING WELL
The universe  is 14 bill
The earth 4.5 billl
And us 200,000
It commen sense right  ?
#28
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,301
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
Could ya say that little bay bay chatbot has surrogate parents.

I hope its parent companys are of leagl age.

Actually  You have to be of a certain age to be a baby AI
#29
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 410
2
3
5
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
2
3
5
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
I hope its parent companys are of leagl age.
OpenAI created ChatGPT. OpenAI was created in 2015.
#30
cristo71
cristo71's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,898
3
2
3
cristo71's avatar
cristo71
3
2
3
-->
@Dr.Franklin
One of the more interesting myths is the idea that Darwin was the product of the Enlightenment, someone who challenged dogma according to reason.
Darwin did challenge dogma according to reason… and observation.

Darwin promoted the idea that the evolution of species on earth was due to chance and probability, and thus nature is inherently chaotic.
This claim needs to be substantiated, as it sounds reductive at best.

The ENTIRE idea of the Enlightenment was to prove that the world was orderly, harmonious, and non-chaotic.
This claim also needs to be substantiated. From what I understand, you had it more correct initially— that it was about reason over dogma.

I actually don’t have a cherished ideological “dog” in this particular fight, but your claims appear specious.