69  Chance processes
Menu  |  back

In evolution theory, the generally used term “chance” in the sense of “without plan, objective or purpose” has a negative connotation while the use of the term “chance” in the sense of a stochastic process (see definition below) is an imprecise contention without any substance. Theoretical rejection of a guiding force (e.g., a God) or causality of any kind or the flat assertion of stochastic processes is meaningless. This remains so even when a factor of alleged necessity is added to chance.


The chance factor is a recurrent theme in evolution theory. Chance is decisive or at least partially decisive for mutation as well as selection and in the remaining evolutionary factors (recombination, gene loss, gene multiplication, jumping genes, horizontal gene transfer, separation of a population, etc.) (1).

We speak of chance when an event is not the result of a causal inevitability. However, in common speech the term is also used when an event is not foreseeable, predictable, or calculable in practice. Chance should never be confused with unpredictability or incalculability.


Definition of chance and stochastic according to the Brockhaus Encyclopedia:

Chance: “That which occurs without recognizable reason or intention, that which may occur however does not have to occur (opposite: imperative).”

Stochastic: “Art associated with guessing ... Generic term for probability theory ... Stochastic includes ...all quantifiable aspects of random events″ (2).
 

Ernst Mayr on chance and imperative: “Unfortunately many oversee the fact ... that ... natural selection is a two-stage process. In the second step, selection is, in fact, decisive for adaptation. However, the first step, the origin of the variation, supplies the material for natural selection and stochastic processes (i.e., chance events) dominate here.... Moreover, it should never be forgotten that chance also plays a significant role in the second step of evolution, consisting of survival and reproduction” (3). According to Ernst Mayr “chance” is an “unforeseeable event” (4).

The term chance is used by proponents of evolution, on one hand, in the sense of a stochastic process and, on the other (at least implicitly), in the more common sense of (according to Mayr explicitly) without plan or objective (5).

In this regard, Charles Darwin wrote, “Up to now, I have used the word “chance” when speaking of changes which occur more frequently in organic beings in the state of domestication and more seldom those in a natural state. Naturally, the word chance is not a proper designation; however, it at least implies our lack of knowledge of the causes of specific changes” (6).


Chance as negative concept:

The use of the term chance in evolution theory in the sense of without plan, objective or meaning is a negative claim without any substance. Theoretical rejection of a guiding force or of a god or causality of any kind is meaningless like every negative assertion. The term used in the doctrine of evolution therefore remains unsubstantial even when it is combined with the alleged factor of necessity because unsubstantial times substantial always results in unsubstantial.


Chance in the sense of a stochastic process:

The use of the term chance as an evolutionary factor in the sense of stochastic processes is nothing more than acknowledgment that no or no precise knowledge of how evolution operates is available. If we assume causalities and they were already explained in theory or even researched empirically, it would no longer be necessary to use the term chance or stochastic processes as an expression of lack of knowledge.

In fact, it is not possible to delimit the initial situation before innumerous mutations for alleged upward development of organisms, nor is it possible to draw any statistical conclusions at the genetic level regarding alleged individual macro evolutionary processes and certainly not regarding a number of such contiguous processes. Common assertions about stochastic processes are and remain absolutely unsubstantial without known initial situation or probability calculations.

Moreover, before a stochastic process can occur, it is necessary to develop the individuals; from them a selection is then possible. It is first necessary to invent and produce a die with six dots before it can be cast. It is not possible to designate something as a stochastic process as long as there is no possibility for selection. Here, it is necessary to differentiate precisely between the origin of something new and development of things that already exist. Evolution theory has no explanation for origin of anything new. Blank statements regarding the stochastic process do not provide any substantial (reasonably founded) explanations for development from things already existing.


Conclusion (7) :

The information associated with chance and every statement associated with the chance factor is unsubstantial. The factors chance times law always result in chance: 0 x 1 = 0. As soon as a statement contains a factor of chance, the entire allegation becomes unsubstantial, incomprehensible and improvable.

Asserting a theory whose central statement refutes any supernatural force or any other causality and otherwise claims not to know what is happening, does not, in principle, represent any theory at all.



These 70  |  Menu
back

References:

(1) Ernst Mayr, Das ist Evolution, 3. A., München 2003, page 177.
(2) Der Brockhaus, Naturwissenschaft und Technik, Heidelberg, 2003.
(3) Ernst Mayr, pages 281, 338, 343.
(4) Ernst Mayr, page 354.
(5) Ernst Mayr, pages 154 & 263.
(6) Charles Darwin, Die Entstehung der Arten, übersetzt von Carl W. Neumann, Nikol Verlag Hamburg, 2004, page 188.
(7) Dieter Aebi, Prozessakte Evolution, Evolution contra Kreation aus juristischer Sicht, Dillenburg 2006.
 
Comment this Site!