On Monday, April 7, 2014 11:03:35 PM UTC-4, Liz R wrote: > > On 8 April 2014 09:41, Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com <javascript:>>wrote: > >> On Monday, April 7, 2014 4:38:42 PM UTC-4, Alberto G.Corona wrote: >>> >>> 2014-04-07 22:25 GMT+02:00 Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> On Sunday, April 6, 2014 2:45:35 AM UTC-4, Alberto G.Corona wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Probably you saw people visiting houses in your neighbourhood, but >>>>> that did not reached consciousnees you were busy thinking about other >>>>> things. (I will not insert here these funny videos of people failing >>>>> to recognize a bear in the middle of a scene). >>>>> >>>> >>>> These kinds of dismissals are not scientific. When you have a genuinely >>>> precognitive experience, you would really have to bend over backward to >>>> mistake it for anything else. >>>> >>>> If you say so... >>> >>>> >>>>> But according with a theory of evolutionary psychology, dreams are in >>>>> order to be prepared for possible threats specially the most dangerous >>>>> ones. The material of the dreams is taken from past events, and the >>>>> subconscious takes into account not only the things that were you >>>>> conscious of, but everithing. >>>>> >>>> >>>> You could just as easily say that dreams are in order to confuse us so >>>> that we will be unprepared for possible threats to weed out the more >>>> easily >>>> confused members of the species. Just-so stories are fun to make up, but >>>> we >>>> shouldn't take them seriously. >>>> >>>> >>> You could as easily say it as well that plants are aliens. and Craig is >>> the father of Dark Vader. Yes . You can say so. But it is not something >>> based on the theory of evolution, that is, natural selection and >>> evolutionary biology. >>> >> >> What I'm saying though is that the theory of evolution can be used to >> advance or deny any position on dreams that we care to take. It's all >> reverse engineered story telling. >> >> There is an element of this in all evolutionary explanations, but only > until we are in a position to gather enough evidence to make a call for or > against some idea. Evolution has been observed in action, to a limited > extent, and the links between genes and various behaviours, structures etc > is becoming clearer, so we have a better idea as time goes on what > mechanisms have evolved and why. > > For example I recently read something about zebra's stripes being "for" > protecting them from insects (I think it was) rather than making them > harder for carnivores to spot. This was because someone had done some > experiments to distinguish between several theories of what advantage the > stripes gave. >
Sure, but mechanisms which have an effect on the world of the body need not have an impact on something that doesn't (like dreams). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
