so you're taking a sort of Occams razor viewpoint
the simplest explanation is right?

I don't think it fits. Too many bits are missing, too many assumptions made, too many exceptions elbowed out of the equation
( Amberl was stripey and dominated Europe, Tue 24 Aug 2010, 16:56, 2 replies, latest was 16 years ago)

Ok, and not meaning to be arsey about this, I'm just enjoying wading in the middle of the debate
But which bits are missing, which assumptions are being made, and which exceptions have been elbowed out?

I admit, you have to take some rather convoluted routes to explain some of the more 'human' aspects of emotion or behaviour in these terms, but I do believe it can be done.
(LongJohnBaldry, Tue 24 Aug 2010, 16:59, Reply)

Occam was a very clever man
You are more than entitled to have that opinion of course. I'm not enough of a scientist to convincingly argue otherwise on a message board.

The fact here is that we did evolve successfully to become the dominant species on this planet. We didn't do that because sentience was useful for naval gazing and questioning our existence.
( Kroney, Tue 24 Aug 2010, 17:02, Reply)