As Denyse O’Leary asks, “Why is it comparatively easy to develop a program to play chess, as opposed to teaching a robot to walk freely?”
Darwin’s evolutionary mechanism is just a blunt recipe, an algorithm, and it can only select what is immediately functional.
It’s strikes me that this is a difference between design and Darwinian thinking.
Egnor he nails it by noting that Shallit, not uniquely, falls victim to the mereological fallacy.
The failure to understand the gulf that separates humans from animals, and humans from machines, is a source of confusion to rival almost any other.