I fear you are correct.I fear this argument might require a good deal of back reading to really get into.
~~ Paul
I fear you are correct.I fear this argument might require a good deal of back reading to really get into.
Yes, in the case of evolution the force that accumulates complexity is natural selection.Random interactions? Assuming you mean natural selection?
Random is indeed a bad choice of words, undirected maybe would have been better, but that does not change the gist of what i am trying to say.Not sure what makes the interactions of neurons "random"?
You need both to drive the changes toward complexity, at least if you want a reasonable rate of evolution. Random changes alone will just produce random differences.Bart - If I read Neo-Darwinism correctly, I believe that it would be 'random' mutation which gets us complexity and not natural selection. Natural selection gets us editing. I'm also not comfortable calling natural selection a force. (my 2 cents)