PHIL 5 MID TERM (REVISION)

4. Joseph Craft
5. Killa_Craft_2000
6. Killa_craft_2000@yahoo.com
7. Philosophy - http://craftphil5.blogspot.com/
8. I have completed all the required readings.
9. I have watched all the required films.
10. Posts
Week 1&2 – Philosophy Films - Java Philosophy post 1

The film Java Philosophy depicts a view of life from different people.Life is a long journey that no one has figured out. Depending on thetype of situations one encounters, life can be free, smooth, andexciting. On the other hand, if one is dealt a bad hand, then he orshe can be viewed as a rebel. In societies view a person out to makechanges to the world. The film has many opinions about the way oneshould travel through this journey of life.
To live and to die is our destiny. The film shows young adults in the60's – 70's era enjoying them selves when there was many socialproblems active around them. I think the film is making a point tolive now. The future is uncertain. This is stated clearly with thespace shuttle voyage that's displayed towards the end of the film. Thefilm argues that no matter what decisions one makes there will beregret, so live with it and enjoy.

Week 1&2 – Philosophy Films - Nicholas of Cusa Film post 2

This film shows that even great thinkers could not simplify the mostdifficult problems. Ignorance is a part of nature. Man will neverknow everything there is to know. When items are compared to eachother, it's easy to comprehend likes and differences. The film statesthat Pythagoras deemed all things to be constituted and understoodthrough the power of numbers. I think this explains why mathematicsplays a large role in the world. For the unknown is what drives one topursue higher learning.The film points out that no matter how much one learns in his lifetimeit will never be enough. There will always be new things to learn.There will always be problems that have no solution. Therefore, thefilm proposes the question of how much is one to learn? Does ignorancefuel our desire to learn? Or does it simply state that we will neverknow the simply facts of life?

Week 1&2 – Assigned Reading - THE SOCRATIC UNIVERSE post 3

This was a collection of opinions from philosophers in California. Itconsisted of their views on life, religion, and death. The interviewconsists of several questions that received a few different answers.It proves that all philosophers do not think alike. Most of thephilosophers did not agree on many of the subjects presented to them.However, I was impressed with the reasoning behind their answers.I wouldn't agree with some of them when it comes to religion. A personlooking for physical proof of an afterlife needs to do some soulsearching first. I think the piece shows the diversity of thinkers.Everyone has different experiences and I believe that theseexperiences lead them to have certain beliefs.

Week 1&2 – Assigned Reading – Apology post 4
Plato's version of Socrates defense is an excellent story. Therecount of the events that had led to this trail or somewhatconfusing. Plato mentions that Socrates is on trail because of pastand future endeavors. It seems that the citizen have been disgustedwith Socrates for a while now. He believes most people dislike wasfueled by false rumors. Socrates pleads his defense to the judgesand does his best to persuade them. However, the verdict is not inhis favor. He once again he attempted to convince the judges thatwhat he is doing is not wrong, but the decision stands and accordingto Plato, the punishment is death.I assume that he was sentenced to death for his beliefs. During thistime Socrates, was ahead of his fellow thinkers. I believe there wasno possibility of Socrates escaping a guilty verdict. In the text,he claimed that he could have attempted to bribe a few judges tovote in favor of an acquittal. However, he does not do this. Hebelieves that he can convince the judges on his defense alone andthat no matter what happens he believes he is doing the right thing.

Weeks 1&2 – Assigned Reading - History of Philosophy post 5
I think that philosophy is much the same in the 21st century than itwas in the earlier centuries. I noticed that Wikipedia insists that20th century thinkers were out to change older knowledge systems, buthow can they change an older system that they had no part of building.The reasoning behind the older systems probably doesn't stand totoday's thinkers. However, today's philosophers' should focus onbuilding a new system.The problems that are encountered by today's philosophers may be morecomplex than their predecessors' problems. However, it is stillpossible to attack the issues in the same manor. Rather thanreinventing previous philosophers' work, philosophers should focus onwhat's important to today's society.

Week 1&2 – Expert Lecture – Aldous Huxley post 6
In the Aldous Huxley film, Huxley believes that most people have shied away from thinking. “They are shocked by the major advances in technology...,” he says in the film. He does quite understand why most people are amazed when it is quite simple to suspect advancements will be made with the sudden burst of technology. Huxley suggests that people should anticipate these changes rather than sit back in “aw” of the inventions.

He also hints at the fact that education should be concentrated more over a broad area instead of focusing on one discipline. I think that he also views technology as double edge sword because we are sacrificing mental or physical attributes to allow technology to do the job for us.

Week 1&2 –Expert Lecture- Francis Fuyuama End of History post 7

Francis Fuyuama states the history has a direction and is near its end because “everybody agrees on the basic shapes of institutions.” Fuyuama claims that democracy, capitalism has been able to provide what dictatorship could not, and that is peace.

For the most part, Fuyuama believes it is a peaceful between the super powers of the world. In fact, most of the war conflicts occur between the smaller third world countries. He states that most issues are conquered. Therefore, a combination of human nature and the end science could possible bring about an end of history. However, Fuyuama is quick to point out that we are not close to seeing the end of science.

Weeks 3&4 – Philosophy Films – Little Things that Jiggle Pos post 1

A Greek sophist named Protagoras believed that man is the measure ofall things. This claim remains true. Technology has increaseddramatically in the last 100 years and has allowed scientists to seecloser into the world around them. Every element contains tiny atomsthat form matter. In the video "Little things that jiggle", fourforces control matter. These forces control the universe and withoutthese forces, there would be no universe.How small or large is the universe? The universe seems gigantic, butit can be small to a higher being. Is it possible? It would be hard orimpossible to prove. However, the great distances between the planetsare similar to distances of electrons in atoms. I think that astechnology increases humans will one day see that we are smaller thanwe think in this universe.

Weeks 3&4 – Expert Lecture - Owen Gingrich Astronomy, God, and Jesus post 2

According to Owen Gingrich, there is not any concrete evidence thatGod does or does not exist. However, if one looks to the stars abovefor answers, the things that took place for the earth to exist wasprecise and one little difference about mass and one can argue thatthe universe could possibly be very different. How would have thiseffected life on earth?
No one knows for sure, but it seems obvious to some scientist thatthe perfect harmonious universe that the Milky Way galaxy travels inis the work of a higher being. Gingrich states that purpose anddesign is the only true way to study the universe. Without purposeand design, there will be no reason to pursue comprehension of theuniverse.Gingrich points out that the possibility of other universes withdifferent parameters is possible. However, this has never beenproven. On the other hand, Christians believe that there is a heavenand a hell. Would these places be considered other universes?Gingrich thinks that Jesus is the evidence that God does exist. Theteachings of Jesus are more than just messages for the individual.They are lessons for the world as a whole to learn. Gingrich arguesthat the world's population is increasing and the resources aredecreasing. Therefore, it is only a matter of time before thepopulation is faced with many problems from resource shortages. Hethinks that the teachings of Jesus about sharing and forgivenesswill be the only way for the earth's population to strive.

Week 3&4 – Philosophy films – Gods too Decompose Post 3

In the short film "Gods too Decompose", a person is looking for God. Anearby crowd over hears his frustration and starts to poke fun at him.It is apparent that the crowd does not believe in God and suggest thatthis man is foolish for even posing the question. However, the tideturns when the mysterious man changes his tune and states that God isnot here, but he is actually dead. He even states that humankind andhis murderous ways have killed what was left of God.I think that man actually is referring to religion. That everythingreligion stood for has been taken away by humankind's greediest sins.In fact, the church has been facing accusations about protectingpriest that were sexual predators. These unfortunate events have ledsome people away from religion. Therefore, man has been assisting thedevil in driving some people away from religion, and has actually helpmurder the life that God wanted for his people.

Week 3&4 – Expert Lecture – Lisa Randall on the Universe Post 4

Lisa Randall believes that there could be more than dimensions in theuniverse. During the interview, she provides sketches about parts ofthe theory. The sketch that shows a 3 dimensional object passingthrough a 2 dimensional world was superb. It should how objects couldhave already journeyed through this 4 dimensional world and could havewent undetected.I am pleased by how humble she said science made her feel. She admitsthat humans are probably not alone in this universe and could easilybe one of many planets with life. The work she put into the theoryabout a possibly 5th or 6th dimension is extraordinary. She isthrilled that someone is willing to prove her theory and that she islooking forward to finding new information about the role gravityplays in other dimensions.

Week 3&4 – Expert Lecture - Edward O Wilson on creation post 5

In the interview with Edward O. Wilson he eagerly wants to convincereligious organizations and scientist to team up together to save theenvironment. Wilson believes that the earth's environment is indesperate need of repair. It will take everyone to make a change.Wilson believes that reaching out to the religious can create astronger team to figure out a fix or some kind of plan that can beused to turn this path around. Wilson points out that many animals,plants are near extinction, and if the climate continues to change,the planet could lose more than half of the plants.The problem that this planet faces is gigantic. It will take more thana few scientist and religious organization to patch up the problem.Recycling can do only so much. The big corporations have a large partin polluting the planet and should have a huge part in the clean up.Therefore, the team should consist of more than scientist, religiongroups, and green foregoers.

Week 3&4 – Assigned Reading – was cosmic inflation the cause of the big bang post 6

The article discusses the big bang theory. What could have caused thebig bang? Well according to the article no one is exactly sure, butthe big bang theory only discusses the aftermath rather than theactually bang. Most of the article focuses on the inflationaryuniverse. According to the article, cosmic inflation could haveprovided the necessary tools to trigger the bang needed for the bigbang.The inflationary theory of the universe concentrates on what couldhave possible been the universe before the bang or expanding of theuniverse. The theory appears to be acceptable and the model wholestrue to general relativity. According to the article, the universestarted smaller than the size of an atom. Then the universe expandedto the size scientist believes it is now.

Weeks 3&4 – Expert lecture – New kind of Science post 7

Stephen Wolfram started researching about complicated structures such as the universe. He is questioning the complexity of the universe if it started from a single cell and a simple rule. He was able to create a program that created a random pattern that was created with a simple and single cell. Wolfram suggests that this kind of science “cellular automata” can be applied to any system.

According to Wolfram, complicated patterns were always thought to be created with complicated rules. However, his cellular automata proves that a simple rule can create complicated patterns. Wolfram suggests that nature could possible have used a simple rule and created the complexity we see today.


Week 5 – Philosophy Films – Survival of the sufficient post 1

In the short film survival of the sufficient, it states that thenotion of survival of the fittest is wrong. In fact, the film statesthat natural selection is nothing more than an ordinary editingfeature. Who does the editing? According to the short film, parents,friends, teachers, etc play a major role in editing all persons stillsurviving.I disagree with this notion because it cannot account for environmentsthat have no control. Weaker links disappear whether they are editedor not. The stronger creatures take over any space regardless if it isoccupied or not. Therefore, survival of the fittest is nature's way ofallowing stronger and smarter creatures to reproduce and to continuewith life.

Week 5 – Philosophy films – Truth Lies post 2

In the short film "Truth Lies", it argues that it is easier to livewith a purpose even if that purpose is nonexistent. In fact, humankindhas filled the void and continued with life. The universe seems to berandom and everything that happens to a person seems random. However,this chaotic randomness is unwanted. One feels more comfortable and atease if the randomness can be accounted for and understood. Accordingto the film, one might believe in God just because any meaning isbetter than no meaning.It is true that we cannot live without purpose. What would be thepoint of existing if life did not have a purpose? In this shortjourney called life, one must figure out his or her purpose. If he orshe gives up on finding out this purpose or takes the wrong path, thenthe outcome is unfavorable. I believe that truth does not lie, but thetruth does hurt. Suppose one did find out there is no purpose to life,no purpose to the universe. What kind of environment would one livein. A dog eat dog type world, where the only mission is to survive andreproduce. It sounds much like the world I already know too well.

Week 5 – Philosophy films – Fundamentalism is a Mental Disease Post 3

In the film “fundamentalism is a mental disease”, it states that people who cannot think came up with this ideal of creation. The concept of creation is nothing more than fog on a winding road. It distorts life and complicates it according to the film. The film suggests that fundamentalism is just a weak attempt to include God in evolution. In fact, the film suggests that once one is free from this creation nonsense, one can continue with life with no fog. “It will be a clear path.”

I disagree with this notion because fundamentalism, like any other organization, can have a few bad seeds. These bad seeds give everyone across the board a bad name. This is not the case in many situations. It is a waste of time to try to convince a true believer. Either a person believes in God or does not. There is no gray area here. Fundamentalism has little effect on the average believer and does not influence someone who looks at this earth and is grateful to have participated in this great gift of life.

Week 5 – Expert lecture – Owen Wilson post 4

In the interview with Edward O. Wilson he eagerly wants to convincereligious organizations and scientist to team up together to save theenvironment. Wilson believes that the earth's environment is indesperate need of repair. It will take everyone to make a change.Wilson believes that reaching out to the religious can create astronger team to figure out a fix or some kind of plan that can beused to turn this path around. Wilson points out that many animals,plants are near extinction, and if the climate continues to change,the planet could lose more than half of the plants.The problem that this planet faces is gigantic. It will take more thana few scientist and religious organization to patch up the problem.Recycling can do only so much. The big corporations have a large partin polluting the planet and should have a huge part in the clean up.Therefore, the team should consist of more than scientist, religiongroups, and green foregoers.


Week 5 – Expert Lecture – Richard Dawkins post 5

Dawkins states that a combination of evolution and natural selection has created the design in the world. He actually blames religion for giving non-intelligent individuals this false sense of hope. According to Dawkins, religion disagrees with evolution and that there is plenty evidence that suggest evolution occurred. However, there is no evidence that proves God exist.


Week 5 – Assigned Readings – Evolution 101 post 6

According to the reading Evolution 101, “Biological evolution, simply put, is descent with modification”, and that “Biological evolution is not simply a matter of change over time. Lots of things change over time: trees lose their leaves, mountain ranges rise and erode, but they aren't examples of biological evolution because they don't involve descent through genetic inheritance.”

I don’t believe in evolution for the simply fact that there is no animals evolving today. Why has evolution stop? Or a better question is why is it moving so slow? In addition, it only makes senses that every creature would be composed of the same structures since there is only one creator.


Week 5 – Assigned Readings – The Selfish Gene post 7

According to Richard Dawkins, meme theory eliminates free will and that every decision one makes is actually imitating a previous decision that someone else has already made. Therefore, people are actually repeating the same process that individuals before them followed. Dawkins suggest that, “tunes, ideals, and catch-phrases [etc]” are forms of meme and are passed down from generation to generation. The better memes or ones that are more popular tend are accepted in culture and tend to stick around longer than weaker ones.

I believe this theory to a certain extent. Most people do imitate a person who is successful in order for them to be successful. However, the individual still made the decision. Consciously or unconsciously, one still has a certain amount of control over these memes. If this theory were correct, then all memes across the globe should be the same. Tunes and catch phrase change from country to country. I feel that there are too many intangibles to consider before finding this theory plausible.


11. Lisa Randall presents a sketch of a two dimensional world and what a three-dimensional object would look like passing through that world. The occupants would not be able to tell it was a three dimensional object. However, they would see evidence that some type of layered object has passed through the particular area.


12. In the Aldous Huxley film, Huxley believes that most people have shied away from thinking. “They are shocked by the major advances in technology...,” he says in the film. He does quite understand why most people are amazed when it is quite simple to suspect advancements will be made with the sudden burst of technology. Huxley suggests that people should anticipate these changes rather than sit back in “aw” of the inventions. He also hints at the fact that education should be concentrated more over a broad area instead of focusing on one discipline. I think that he also views technology as double edge sword because we are sacrificing mental or physical attributes to allow technology to do the job for us.

13. Religion and science are compatible to a certain extent. However, I feel that a line has to be drawn somewhere to separate the two. In order for them to be compatible, one must stop where the other begins. I also see religion as the beginning and the ending of the journey of life with science in the middle to assist with problems encountered. I think Elizabeth Lloyd put it best when she stated, “I think that religion and science are compatible, but I think that they are about different things that we can observe and run into, and manipulate, and build things with and understand. And I think that religion is about everything else”. Science can explain things to improve the quality of life, and that is needed. However, science tends to explain more than necessary.

14. According to Plato in the “Apology”, Socrates is on trail because of his so-called evil teachings to the youth and his disbeliefs for the gods. Plato states that Socrates tried to persuade the court by questioning his accusers and meticulously answering his own questions with precise answers. He does not beg or plea with the court rather he states the facts and raises ethical questions about his own teachings. He states that it would not make sense for him to corrupt the youth for in return they might harm him in the future. He also makes a claim that it would be impossible and ridiculous for him to teach the young not to believe in the gods because there would be no reason to do this. For example, Socrates denies to have received high amounts of monetary compensation for his teachings. Therefore, there would be no reason for him to eagerly search for students and teach them.

15. History of Philosophy
Western Philosophy
Ancient philosophy (600 BC to 600 AD)
i. Thales
ii. Socrates
iii. Plato
iv. Aristotle
v. Epicurus
vi. Epictetus
Medievial Philosophy (600 AD to 1400 AD)
i. St. Anselm
ii. Albert the Great
iii. Thomas Aquinas
iv. Duns Scotus
v. Pierre Abelard
vi. Marsilius of Padua
Modern Philosophy (1400 AD to 1900 AD)
i. Nicholas Cusa
ii. Machiavelli
iii. Copernicus
iv. Erasmus
v. Bacon
vi. Hobbes
vii. Descartes
viii. Locke
ix. Rousseau
x. Wollstonecraft
Contemporary Philosophy (1900 AD to present)
i. Planck
ii. Einstein
iii. Weber
iv. Beauvoir
v. Gandhi
vi. Heisenberg
vii. Nietszche
viii. Russell
ix. Gadamer
-

16. According to the big bang theory, the big bang was a single explosion that sent matter flying outward at incredible speeds. This matter turned into stars and galaxies. The theory suggests that the universe is expanding and that all the galaxies are moving away from each other. The inflation Theory developed by Alan Guth, states that the universe rapidly expanded very quickly after the big bang. Guth suspects that this is the reason the universe looks uniformed when view at a large scale. If one truly were to understand the changes here on earth, he or she would have to have knowledge of things happening outside of this planet. The origin of the universe plays a large role in religion and philosophy. One can learn more about the universe and debate whether there are more dimensions besides this one.

17. Einstein and Heisenberg had different views regarding the Uncertainty Principle. Einstein believed that, “Of course, we can know where something is; we can know the position of a moving particle if we know every possible detail, and therefore by extension, we can predict where it will go’. However, Bohr and Heisenberg had a very different theory. According to Heisenberg, “We can only know the probable position of a moving particle, therefore by extension, we can only know its probable destination; we can never know with absolute certainty where it will go.” On the other hand, they both agreed that the uncertainty principle was an important step in the development of quantum mechanics.


18. According to Richard Dawkins, meme theory eliminates free will and that every decision one makes is actually imitating a previous decision that someone else has already made. Therefore, people are actually repeating the same process that individuals before them followed. Dawkins suggest that, “tunes, ideals, and catch-phrases [etc]” are forms of meme and are passed down from generation to generation. The better memes or ones that are more popular tend are accepted in culture and tend to stick around longer than weaker ones. I believe this theory to a certain extent. Most people do imitate a person who is successful in order for them to be successful. However, the individual still made the decision. Consciously or unconsciously, one still has a certain amount of control over these memes. If this theory were correct, then all memes across the globe should be the same. Tunes and catch phrase change from country to country. I feel that there are too many intangibles to consider before finding this theory plausible.

19. The way humans think is a mystery. What makes us different from the other creatures on this planet? Why is our behavior radically different from all other creatures? Perhaps biological evolution could shed some light onto these questions. I think that Darwin, Wilson, and Dawkins would all agree that biological evolution consistently proves that evolution took place. Therefore, if science could pinpoint specific changes that have occurred, biological evolution can prove that humans have evolved. However, one could argue that biological evolution would only show that all creatures where made by one creator since chemical composition is very similar across the board. If this could prove that mental and physical abilities have changed, then it would explain why our thoughts and behavior has changed.

20. .In the film “fundamentalism is a mental disease”, it states that people who cannot think came up with this ideal of creation. The concept of creation is nothing more than fog on a winding road. It distorts life and complicates it according to the film. The film suggests that fundamentalism is just a weak attempt to include God in evolution. In fact, the film suggests that once one is free from this creation nonsense, one can continue with life with no fog. “It will be a clear path.” I disagree with this notion because fundamentalism, like any other organization, can have a few bad seeds. These bad seeds give everyone across the board a bad name. This is not the case in many situations. It is a waste of time to try to convince a true believer. Either a person believes in God or does not. There is no gray area here. Fundamentalism has little effect on the average believer and does not influence someone who looks at this earth and is grateful to have participated in this great gift of life.


21. Owen Gingerich and Edward Wilson believe that religion and science are very powerful tools. In addition, they both hint to a middle ground where religion and science can meet. However, Gingerich states that science and religion can co exist and that it would make little sense not to belief that, there is no God. He also suggests that without purpose, life has played a cruel trick on us. On the other hand, Wilson hints at he does not believe in a designer for the universe. However, Wilson believes that science and religion should combine to take care of world problems. Wilson thinks that science and religion should set aside differences and focus on taking care of this earth because at this point it is the most important job we have. Gingerich is more persuasive than Wilson about religion is. Gingerich states that there are things can prove, but they are also things it cannot. He seems very sincere and unbiased in his statements about religion. Whereas Wilson appears to be one sided and really does not present the other side at all.

22. Francis Fuyuama states the history has a direction and is near its end because “everybody agrees on the basic shapes of institutions.” Fuyuama claims that democracy, capitalism has been able to provide what dictatorship could not, and that is peace. For the most part, it is a peaceful world between the super powers of the world. In fact, most of the war conflicts occur between the smaller third world countries. He states that most world issues are conquered. Therefore, a combination of human nature and the end of science could possible bring about an end of history. However, Fuyuama is quick to point out that we are not close to seeing the end of science.

*23. Nicholas of Cusa’s philosophy suggests that there is too much to learn and that one can never learn everything. Therefore, he or she is still in the unknowing. He states that we try to simply things we do not understand by given it a process. The more difficult the task the harder it is for us to understand. Our ignorance tells us that we are in control and that we should be able to figure it out. However, he states that if we can overcome our ignorance then we can then start to learn. Nicholas of Cusa comes to the conclusion that even after one has learned as much as possible, he or she can only come to the agreement that their so much that is still unknown.


*24. Friedrich Nietzsche believes that the scientific enlightenment killed God. That man is trying to separate himself from God. The evolution theory would suggest that man has no meaning in the universe and that we are all here just by chance. This world heavily relies on science to answer all questions now. In the past, the church was sought after to find answers, but times have changed and people do not want uncertainty. They want concrete answers. People want proof and science is the only method that can provide the answers.

*25. If one is to fully understand how a computer functions, he or she must know how it is built and the processes it uses to operate. I think the same goes for Philosophy. To have an understanding on how humans function, one must learn about the building blocks that create life. Therefore, physics would be the one area that can shed light on the subject. Physics allows us to look deeper into the elements that make this life possible. The study of the tiny pieces of matter that combine to make every single item on this planet is essential to philosophy.

26. It seems in order for one to have freedom of religion, one must have freedom from other religions. For example, Muslims do not expect Christians to dress how they do. Its freedom from religion that allows one to practice his personal religion without consenting to rules set forth by other religions. One can explore religions without having to commit to a particular one. On the other hand, he or she could chose not to even bother with religion all together.

*27. In an interview with Gordy Slack, Dawkins said that “You can't statistically explain improbable things like living creatures by saying that they must have been designed because you're still left to explain the designer, who must be, if anything, an even more statistically improbable and elegant thing.” Dawkins states that a combination of evolution and natural selection has created the design in the world. He actually blames religion for giving non-intelligent individuals this false sense of hope. According to Dawkins, religion disagrees with evolution and that there is plenty evidence that suggest evolution occurred. However, there is no evidence that proves God exist. Dawkins argues that there is no point in religion because there is no way to prove any of it. Therefore, it is impossible to defend. Thus, it is a waste of time for him and there is simply no point in it.



28. Science cannot offer mystery comparable to religion. I believe that science requires more proof than religion. There is a minutia amount of mystery around science because even a theory requires some kind of probability. On the other hand, religion has different parameters that each individual can shape into his or her own. The main mystery behind religion is faith. Faith is the backbone of most religions. The mystery of believing a creator without seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, or smelling this creator is a greater mystery than science could ever provide.

*29. Stephen Wolfram started researching about complicated structures such as the universe. He is questioning the complexity of the universe if it started from a single cell and a simple rule. He was able to create a program that created a random pattern that was created with a simple rule and single cell. In addition, the patterns would change if the rules changed just for one single cell. Therefore, a system that seems simple in nature could create complex structures with simple rules. Wolfram suggests that this kind of science “cellular automata” can be applied to any system whether physical or biological. According to Wolfram, complicated patterns were always thought to be created with complicated rules. However, his cellular automata prove that a simple rule can create complicated patterns. Wolfram suggests that nature could possible have used a simple rule and created the complexity we see today.