Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!edcastle!aipna!cam
From: cam@aipna.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: computer life?
Keywords: Survival, instincts
Message-ID: <4149@aipna.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 13 Mar 91 01:33:34 GMT
References: <1991Feb26.213835.27074@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <1991Feb27.134800.18153@news.larc.nasa.gov> <1991Feb27.150208.27855@mp.cs.niu.edu> <2179@cluster.cs.su.oz.au> <1991Mar11.165932.19507@news.larc.nasa.gov>
Reply-To: cam@aipna.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm)
Organization: Dept of AI, Edinburgh University, UK.
Lines: 21

In article <1991Mar11.165932.19507@news.larc.nasa.gov> kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov ( Scott Dorsey) writes:
>In article <2179@cluster.cs.su.oz.au> carsup@extro.ucc.su.oz.au (Fisher Library support) writes:

>>Has anyone any Proof that life itself was not designed? I think not.

>   We don't have any proof that life wasn't designed, but we do have proof
>that it does evolve.  It's possible that random evolution isn't completely
>a random process, but if so this is something that Man can't duplicate (owing
>to not being omnipotent, etc.)   So it's not something we can discuss 
>intelligently.

Only if you presume that if life was designed, then it must have been
designed by an omnipotent omniscient supernatural being. This seems a
hugely unnecessary presumption, especially given that it seems within
the bounds of possibility that it might (on the other hand) have been
"designed" by evolution, i.e., a natural process.

-- 
Chris Malcolm    cam@uk.ac.ed.aipna   +44 (0)31 667 1011 x2550
Department of Artificial Intelligence,    Edinburgh University
5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK                DoD #205