This is a continuation of an earlier OP. Design by Evolution
When we think of design, it is usually in the context of solving some sort of problem, … To be effective, the design must address a purpose to be achieved. … Thus, effective design requires some feedback mechanism to the designer.
But perhaps we can fit the square peg of purposeless blind watchmaker evolution into the round hole of purposeful intelligent design.
Some people here at TSZ seem to think that no one ever claimed that evolution is a designer. So let’s remind them.
As has been argued many times for more than 150 years, evolution, a design process that is ancient to the extreme, serves as a designer – the blind watchmaker – by using the process of random variation and natural selection, iterated over generations. The concept of design is usually connected with intelligence, and yet evolution – a simple process resulting from reproducing organisms with variation competing for finite resources – can itself efficiently design wondrous creatures, each of which finds different solutions to its primary problem: the problem of survival. It is natural to look to evolution for inspiration on how to create algorithms that can design solutions to our own challenging problems.
It should be no surprise that computer scientists, engineers, mathematicians, robotocists, and biologists alike have made considerable efforts to program evolution into algorithms. … Even in the initial phases of this body of research into what is now called evolutionary computation there were examples of evolutionary algorithms used to create artificial intelligence, design mechanical devices, discover optimal strategies in games, and many other tasks that require the act of designing a solution to a problem.
It seems to me that programming blind purposelessness into an algorithm is a self-defeating proposition.
Evolution is a creative process in every sense of the word creative.
As such, the teaching of evolution in public schools in the US is blatantly unconstitutional.
These quotes are from the Forward to the book Design by Evolution. Tom English and co-author Garrison W. Greenwood even contributed a chapter to this book. So first I would like to ask Tom English to say how strongly he agrees with or disagrees with the sentiments expressed in the forward to this book.