Reply to comment

This week's reading and discussion have put us back to the original question of our existence and it's purpose.

Quoting from Dennett while talking about intelligent design and darwin's theory he says, " So Paley was right in saying that Design was a wonderful thing to explain, but also that Design took intelligence. All he missed- and Darwin provided- was the idea that this intelligence could be broken into bits so tiny and stupid that they didn't count as intelligence at all, and then distributed through space and time in a gigantic, connected network of algorithmic process. The work must get done, but which work gets done is largely a matter of chance, since chance helps determine which problems ( and subproblems and subsubproblems) get "addressed" by the machinery."

This makes me wonder whether Dennett is building upto some big revelation where all the questions or is this way of combining evolution and intelligent design make two opposing ideas merge very neatly?

I am very confused about where this leading to. I am hoping that by the end of this week some of the issues that Dennett is addressing will clear out.I mean to what extent have we progessed in ascertaining the information of our existence. Have we  only caught on to the sub-issues and the minor frames like the crane and evolution? And is the big picture still reliant on fanstastical constructs such as Skyhook and God?