My older step-cousin just got sentenced

[Izzy]

Originally Posted by Arkuski

Not even close. Are you seriously going to compare icy's avatar to the monkey avatar? What a joke dude you're a clown.

The seriouso-meter is off the radar on this one.

[Charu]

...Wait, did this thread seriously turn into a discussion about evolution for a bit?

lmao

lmao

[Pseudo Enigma]

Originally Posted by Charu

...Wait, did this thread seriously turn into a discussion about evolution for a bit?

lmao

lmao

that was arguably the most interesting part.

[adlp]

yeah what happened something about thermometers and dodo birds n shit

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by Dynam0

Although I'd like to see a source for that^ it makes sense to me.

http://www.intothecool.com

Brilliant book about the ubiquity of the Second Law, going from the Energetic to the Complex to the Living to the Human.

Originally Posted by FoJaR

the problem is that the second law doesnt prefer anything. the second law is just a law.

It's not just A law, it's THE law. [cue Omega]

just because something is better at increasing entropy doesnt mean that that thing will be preferred. the second law says nothing about how entropy is increased. in fact it doesnt even say that it necessarily will be, only that it cannot be decreased

Aha! The Second Law itself doesn't necessarily describe the functions of selection, but we have, well, all the natural world to illustrate that for us, cf. Bénard cells, evolution, et al.

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

The problem is that the whole "evolution has a direction" argument is that it's too broad to mean anything. EVERYTHING has a direction if you wish to be super pedantic about it: Heat death.
...
It's silly -- just as silly as saying "evolution has a direction: increasing entropy" or what have you. You could argue that *anything*'s "direction" is increasing entropy, as that's just an inherent attribute of our physical universe.

So yes, you have to reduce the scope unless you're cool with meaningless broad-strokes. Evolution doesn't have a "goal" in the sense that it's just a physical process that's taking place like any other chemical/physical process in our universe.

I think you're focusing too much on the "heat death" aspect of my much earlier post. Of course, all natural laws are going to tend to that end, but I was trying to show that if there is an ultimate goal then every part of the process has to be so ordered regardless of the scope you choose; you only have to re-word it.

I didn't know where the discussion was going to go when I made that post, so I decided to make it short and suss it out later. I had a point; it wasn't mere pedantry.

I am, however, starting to agree with devonin that there is an issue of semantics at hand.

--Guido

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

I think you're focusing too much on the "heat death" aspect of my much earlier post. Of course, all natural laws are going to tend to that end, but I was trying to show that if there is an ultimate goal then every part of the process has to be so ordered regardless of the scope you choose; you only have to re-word it.

Not focusing too much on anything -- you brought up the "direction" as a valid answer in context, and heat death is that direction. You're the one who tossed the entropy wrench into a thread about pedophilia, dude, lol.

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

I didn't know where the discussion was going to go when I made that post, so I decided to make it short and suss it out later.

Also known as "read the thread first so you get the relevant context."

Then again, this thread is shit, so it may be best not to.

I'm fucking bored and can't sleep.

[V-Ormix]

Originally Posted by Charu

...Wait, did this thread seriously turn into a discussion about evolution for a bit?

lmao

lmao

lmao (yeah ill post in a thread ive been reading for like half an hour)

[FoJaR]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

Aha! The Second Law itself doesn't necessarily describe the functions of selection, but we have, well, all the natural world to illustrate that for us, cf. Bénard cells, evolution, et al.

--Guido

you're not really responding to my point. i'm saying that nothing in nature or the second law prefers things which create larger relative entropies, which is your claim.

and again, nothing about evolution or benard cells backs up your claim that the amount of entropy something creates has anything to do with how preferred it will be.

all you can talk about is things that are able to exist within a certain amount of entropy, not what is preferred because of the amount of entropy that thing creates.

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

Not focusing too much on anything -- you brought up the "direction" as a valid answer in context, and heat death is that direction. You're the one who tossed the entropy wrench into a thread about pedophilia, dude, lol.

I brought it up as a point of reference, not a point of discussion or contention. I wanted to establish the fixed end point then bring it back to the scope of evolution on earth and then leave the end result behind.

And hey, I brought thermodynamics into a discussion about evolution, not pedophilia. =)

Also known as "read the thread first so you get the relevant context."

So... I didn't know what throwing the thermo wrench into the thread would do to discussion going forward, so I should take into account the context of the pedophilia discussion that had already been? Mmkay.

Originally Posted by FoJaR

you're not really responding to my point. i'm saying that nothing in nature or the second law prefers things which create larger relative entropies, which is your claim.

and again, nothing about evolution or benard cells backs up your claim that the amount of entropy something creates has anything to do with how preferred it will be.

all you can talk about is things that are able to exist within a certain amount of entropy, not what is preferred because of the amount of entropy that thing creates.

And I'm saying that nature itself prefers such things.

There is an entire field of study of this that you CLEARLY do not know about or understand, and yet you continue to make conclusions about it. I do not understand.

--Guido

[FoJaR]

aright well instead of saying "there is a whole field of study that proves this point", why dont you just post some evidence.

[MixMasterLar]

I like where this thread is going

[Cavernio]

I feel that life, and therefore evolution, exist rather almost in spite of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
To me, entropy and evolution aren't 2 drastically separate things. They almost feel like the same idea, but evolution in terms of genes etc. just has a much smaller scope. Beyond that they're also connected because the origins of life had to have developed somehow, and the same laws that created it, well, ended up becoming what we now call evolution.
So no, it's not just like saying the big bang cooked my noodles. Evolution and entropy are far more parallel, or at the very least are analogous.

Keeping photos of molested children is wrong from one reason in my mind atm, because the child or adult would not want you to have them. They didn't give consent at the time of abuse, so it only makes sense they wouldn't consent to having someone then get off to them later on. Of course there's the fact that they don't know that someone's jacking off to them, so it makes it less or possibly not wrong, but that line of reasoning can be used for so much other deception that most people think of as wrong. One may personally feel wrong about it (like adlp), but without actions that harm people, it's not right for it to be illegal.

As to having institutions for pedophiles, (the link seemed to be broken btw svaz), it shouldn't be about what's 'useful' but about what's right. If we have utility as the basis for our morality, then we can end up in places like saying all disabled people should be killed. Of course, most criminals could probably use rehabilitation instead of regular prison too, but we hardly have the resources for that.

I dunno what's with all the people hating on the thread, I <3 this thread, every, single, post.

[Mollocephalus]

This is a post and cavernio loves it <3

[FoJaR]

alright, did some reading.

you are neglecting quantum mechanics and arguing determinism, right?

[moches]

It's kind of amazing how a simple ethical debate about pedophilia and mental disease has become a debate about quantum mechanics and determinism. I just. Wow.

Not even sarcastic, by the way, keep on doing...whatever you're doing, guys.

[qqwref]

People still making that entropy argument? Even if evolution did increase entropy (which is not necessarily true), the law requiring an increase of entropy only applies to an *isolated* system, which the Earth certainly is not. Energy comes into our system through, for instance, that big bright ball of gas in the sky, and exits through mechanisms such as heat radiation and radio waves.