Nihilism and Fauceir Theory

There is a philosophical tenet around that not only strictly denies teleology but even denies all kinds of meaning in nature an thinking. That's nihilism. Some authors claim Darwin's theory being nihilistic[Error: Wrong macro arguments: "4903" for macro 'ref' (maybe wrong macro tag syntax?)] . I think this is much too far fetched and even some kind of wishful thinking.

The nihilistic arguments can be summarized as follows. As natural selection acts upon randomly distributed traits, evolution has no goal and has no meaning at all. In their view evolution can be compared with a random walk, the outcome uncertain. But is this actually the case?

I think not. Such nihilistic views are contrary to our empirical observation of increasing complexity with the advancement of evolution.

1. Random forces rather demolish than build complexity.
2. Natural selection is not a random but a control process. (See the fauceir generalization of control)

Nihilism is typical of periods of scientific stagnation. It is triggered psychologically. It is part of our human inboard self defense mechanism that allows us to let go what cannot be changed anymore. Evolutionary theory for decades or even a century is characterized by such a stagnation as evolutionary biologists fail to explain the increasing complexity.

Fauceir theory by far is not nihilistic. It explains the progress in evolution as a result of a limited set of rules. But as fauceir theory assumes progress as the goal of evolution, it does not mean Fauceir Theory is teleological. A ball is rolling downhill because gravity is pulling it, and so evolutionary progress is the result of a gravity like force that can be defined and even measured.

[Error: Macro 'references' doesn't exist]