TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
I used to be a development engineer, doing what is called applied science. Applied science has to be more in touch with reality than theoretical science; evolutionary theory.
/facepalm
There is no applied science without theoretical frameworks underpinning those sciences, Einstein.
If I needed to make a new type of widget, it needs to hold up under reality conditions as well as be cheap and reproducible on the factory floor. I can't use theoretical materials, unless I first develop these first to be useful and cheap.
You seem to be confusing "theoretical" with "hypothetical".
In terms of the evolutionary theory, how can I use that theory to make a better human?
You seem to have no idea at all how evolution theory informs the entire medical world.
You also don't seem to understand how evolution theory has applications that go well beyond the biological world.
Ever heared of genetic algorithms? It's an optimization method that has applications in just about anything in terms of solving design problems. It also has practical applications in machine learning / AI and as a search heuristic.
The fuel distribution system of Boeings was optimized with such an algorithm, to name just one example.
Just about ANY optimization module worthy of the name offers GA capability.
In plain words: a GA takes a human design and then makes it better.
It is not factory safe
Ignorant.
Plenty of products, or parts, or systems are optimized using practical applications of evolution theory.
It is more designed like a game of chance. If we try to use it to tell the future, we will need to use the same math as gambling casinos.
No.
This casino approach is not my first choice
It was Boeing's first choice for solving plenty of design problems in their aircraft.
And along with boeing, MANY other companies.
It's also the first choice in plenty of AI and machine learning applications.
Clearly you have NO IDEA what you are talking about.
Before I do that, let me try the Creationist theory instead.
lol
what's that?
"abracadabra" - "poof"?
Is this theory useful and scalable? This theory is less based on material science and more based on addressing the imagination and human nature; neural conscious environment. A better human could mean humans that are more healthy or fit. However, a better human could also mean humans who are better people, in the neural character sense.
Instead of making a new human from scratch, why not use the theory on current humans; since the theory says humans have will and choice. One application of the theory is to show people the proper place for their ego. The ego is often the source of most problems, since each ego subjectivity and objectivity seeks to become the center of its own universe, which can divide people and cause conflicts. The conflict causes the ego to dig in or try to expand.
Creationism uses the theory of a deterministic God, who is above all humans. He is the one who has brought us to this place in space and time, based on a logical plan. Instead of allowing the ego to try to become the center of its own little subjective universe, what would happen if we make the ego a satellite around the theory of God, who by definition, made us all by some form of causal determinism?
We do not need to start life from scratch to form a better human, but to simply use what we already have in terms of a sequences of deterministic events that led to today. This will help the ego find a better way to relate to reality and to each other. This approach will use the ego, to evolve the ego, via its innate will and choice.
I will need volunteers to see if this can work, be scaled and finally go into production; religions. Science is good at the material world but religion is more about the neural world view of consciousness. I like having both tools in my development science tool box.
What a bunch of ignorant drivel.