Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

At Quora: Is it possible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that intelligence was required to create life?

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Josh Anderson writes:

Yes, it is. Here’s the question you should ask yourself: Is symbolic code something that blind, intelligence-free physical processes could create and use? Or is mind alone up to the task?

The legendary John Von Neumann did important work on self-replicating systems. A towering giant in the history of mathematics and pioneer in computer science, he was interested in describing machine-like systems that could build faithful copies of themselves.

Von Neumann soon recognized that it would require both hardware and software. Such a system had to work from a symbolic representation of itself. That is, it must have a kind of encoded picture of itself in some kind of memory.

Crucially, this abstract picture had to include a precise description of the very mechanisms needed to read and execute the code. Makes sense, right? To copy itself it has to have a blueprint to follow. And this blueprint has to include instructions for building the systems needed to decode and implement the code.

Here’s the remarkable thing: Life is a Von Neumann Replicator. Von Neumann was unwittingly describing the DNA based genetic system at the heart of life. And yet, he was doing so years before we knew about these systems.

The implications of this are profound. Think about how remarkable this is. It’s like having the blueprints and operating system for a computer stored on a drive in digital code that can only be read by the device itself. It’s the ultimate chicken and egg scenario.

How might something like this have come about? For a system to contain a symbolic representation of itself the actualization of precise mapping between two realms, the physical realm and an abstract symbolic realm.

In view here is a kind of translation, mechanisms that can move between encoded descriptions and material things being described. This requires a system of established correlations between stuff out here and information instantiated in a domain of symbols.

Here’s the crucial question: Is this something that can be achieved by chance, physical laws, or intelligence-free material processes? The answer is decidedly NO. What’s physical cannot work out the non-physical. Only a mind can create a true code. Only a mind can conceive of and manage abstract, symbolic realities. A symbolic system has to be invented. It cannot come about in any other way.

If you think something like this – mutually interdependent physical hardware and encoded software  can arise through unguided, foresight-less material forces acting over time, think again. If I were to ask you to think of something, anything that absolutely requires intelligence to bring about, you’d be hard pressed to think of a better example. It’s not just that no one understands how it could be done, it’s that we have every reason to believe that it is impossible in principle. No intelligence-free material processes could ever give you something like this.

But wait, how can we be so sure this feature of life was not forged by evolution, built up incrementally by the unseen hand of natural selection? What’s to say this is beyond the ability of evolution to create?

The question answers itself. In order for evolution to take place you have to have a self-replicating system in place. You don’t evolve to the kind of thing we’ve been describing. That is, necessarily, where you begin.

The DNA and the dizzyingly complex molecular machinery that it both uses and describes did not evolve into existence. This much is clear. Any suggestion that it did is not based on a scintilla of empirical evidence or any credible account of how it could have come about in this way.

The conclusion is clear: The unmistakable signature of mind is literally in every cell of every living thing on earth.

Watch a few seconds of this to remind yourself of the kind of mind-bending sophistication in view here:

Quora

Note that John von Neumann mathematically showed that the information content of the simplest self-replicating machine is about 1500 bits of information. This is a vast amount of information, since information bits are counted on a logarithmic scale, and it cannot be explained by any natural process, since it far exceeds the information content of the physical (non-living) universe. Therefore, since self-replicating organisms obviously exist on Earth, their origin must come from the only known source of this level of information – an intelligent mind of capability far beyond our mental ability – consistent with the biblical view of God.

Comments
F/N: Further to the issue of a civilisation in unacknowledged, potentially catastrophic trouble:
Isaiah 5: 18 Woe to those who draw iniquity with cords of falsehood, who draw sin as with cart ropes, 19 who say: “Let him be quick, let him speed his work that we may see it; let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw near, and let it come, that we may know it!” 20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! 21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight! 22 Woe to those who are heroes at drinking wine, and valiant men in mixing strong drink, 23 who acquit the guilty for a bribe, and deprive the innocent of his right!
When we make crooked yardsticks our standard, what is genuinely straight, accurate and upright will never pass the crooked test of conforming to the crooked. So, there will need to be plumb lines that are naturally straight and upright as a test. KF PS, later as time is available, some particulars about a civilisation in trouble. For the moment reflect on the nuclear war threshold flashpoints in Eastern Europe, Iran and China-Taiwan, with our incoherent energy policy and return to high inflation, likely of the stagflation type where we get low growth and inflation. The impact of cultural marxism derived ideology in our universities, media and legislatures should not be overlooked, also the impact of legal positivism and radical activism in that context. While we are at it, what does it say about our elites that the teddy bears in the Balenciaga fiasco were shown with straps and chains, raising sobering questions regarding grooming. There are many more issues but these should be food for thought. PPS, meanwhile, let us note how this thread has been dragged off track from a highly significant focus and even from a secondary question on math and worldviews. Let us note:
Here’s the question you should ask yourself: Is symbolic code something that blind, intelligence-free physical processes could create and use? Or is mind alone up to the task? The legendary John Von Neumann did important work on self-replicating systems. A towering giant in the history of mathematics and pioneer in computer science, he was interested in describing machine-like systems that could build faithful copies of themselves. Von Neumann soon recognized that it would require both hardware and software. Such a system had to work from a symbolic representation of itself. That is, it must have a kind of encoded picture of itself in some kind of memory. Crucially, this abstract picture had to include a precise description of the very mechanisms needed to read and execute the code.
It is obvious, the evolutionary materialist, scientism school and its fellow travellers have no cogent answer or it would have been trumpeted. The only actually observed capable causal factor is intelligently directed configuration and we should not allow ourselves to be distracted and dragged into toxic side tracks. Of course, issues of logic and epistemology are bound up in that observation. I again put on the table,
PRINCIPLES OF GEOLOGY: BEING AN INQUIRY HOW FAR THE FORMER CHANGES OF THE EARTH’S SURFACE ARE REFERABLE TO CAUSES NOW IN OPERATION. [--> appeal to Newton's Rules, in the title of the work] BY CHARLES LYELL, Esq, F.R.S. PRESIDENT OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON . . . JOHN MURRAY , , , 1835 [--> later, publisher of Origin]
Is it hard to see that this is a restraint on ideological speculation?kairosfocus
December 19, 2022
December
12
Dec
19
19
2022
12:15 AM
12
12
15
AM
PDT
TAMMIE LEE HAYNES @349, Nice post. Thanks you. Let's see whether you get any takers on your challenge. Originally, I was also deceived by the descriptions of the Miller-Urey experiment in my education. Same goes for Lenski's experiments. When I do a deeper dive into other breathless announcements, they often seem to be "nothing burgers" as well. -QQuerius
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
08:26 PM
8
08
26
PM
PDT
Sir Giles @350,
KF@344, are you suggesting that I shouldn’t have invited the same sex partners of my two homosexual employees to the company’s annual Christmas dinner?
It depends. If, for example, your company was located in Qatar, such actions would have been a very poor idea. So, do you think Islam should be banned in your country as a consequence of their beliefs and potential reprisals? -QQuerius
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
08:18 PM
8
08
18
PM
PDT
Viola Lee @351, Thank you. Apology happily accepted. -QQuerius
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
08:14 PM
8
08
14
PM
PDT
re 345: Oh my. At 283 I typed Q, not O, but was addressing Origenes, and just now I notice that 297 was from you, not Origenes: it was he I thought I was replying to, because it didn't even occur to me that you were part of the conversation. I have been entirely confused about who is who, and I apologize for the resulting confusion.Viola Lee
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
07:29 PM
7
07
29
PM
PDT
KF@344, are you suggesting that I shouldn’t have invited the same sex partners of my two homosexual employees to the company’s annual Christmas dinner?Sir Giles
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
06:59 PM
6
06
59
PM
PDT
Dear Mr Seversky@335 You misrepresented my statements. Perhaps it was because you didn't read them carefully. In my statements I claimed that THIS is a fact: "ALL the scientific evidence shows that life began through Divine inervention." If you disagree with that claim, please tell us what the contrary evidence is. You asked for "an example of a biology text-book which presents abiogenesis as a well-established theory or scientific fact" Here it is: Miller and Levine "Biology"Pearson Education, Inc 2010, pgs 553 to 555 As a typical example of how prominent Scientists in Biology textbooks discuss the origin of life, Dr Miller makes this deceitful statement regarding the Miller Urey experiment. "The results were spectacular. They produced produced 21 amino acids - building blocks of proteins." As Dr Miller (and his 18 senior faculty "Science Rewiewers) certainly know, the Miller Urey experiment did NOT make building blocks of proteins. Proteins are homochiral, while the amino acids that Miller and Urey were racemic. Today, 70 years after Miller and Urey, Scientists are still unable to overcome this problem. And to hide this failure from millions of students.TAMMIE LEE HAYNES
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
06:58 PM
6
06
58
PM
PDT
Kairosfocus @344, I was surprised to read that the Catholic church did once sanction same-sex marriage despite the clear teachings of the Bible. Since Islam also accepts Torah, it's against their teachings as well and under Shariah law, people who do this are routinely executed along with any apostate" who tries to rationalize this. In the meantime, it will be interesting to see whether the woke mob will ever attack Islam for their beliefs and practices. As a Christian, I follow the final commands given by Jesus Christ in Revelation 22:10-12. My job is clearly not to waste my time "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." -QQuerius
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
06:28 PM
6
06
28
PM
PDT
SG at 340, You can say what you like but their actions can and have been defended in court. All laws discriminate. All laws tell you what you can and cannot do. If they have free exercise of religion, they can do this.relatd
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
06:06 PM
6
06
06
PM
PDT
SG at 342, I hate to break it you but God owns marriage. The importance of marriage for society in general cannot be diluted. "Over the years, marriage has changed. Men no longer have the right to physically discipline their wives. Women no longer have to obey their husbands." Then by that sort of 'reasoning,' why bother getting married? The Bible is clear that husbands should love their wives. They should love and respect each other before the ceremony so that they can enter into a proper union with each other. They should be friends, enjoying each other's company.relatd
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
06:00 PM
6
06
00
PM
PDT
Viola Lee @343,
. . . and at 300 you agreed, I think, that we should drop the discussion. Why are you bringing this back up?
If you actually read @300, you'll notice that it's from Origenes, not Querius, right? And then if you do a search for Querius, you'll find a conspicuous lack of any attacks from Querius directed against you, leaving me confused and protesting my innocence. -QQuerius
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
05:56 PM
5
05
56
PM
PDT
SG, you (along with far too many others) may well be exemplifying a pattern identified 2,000 years ago:
Eph 4: 17 Now this I say and testify in the Lord, that you must no longer walk as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds. 18 They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart. 19 They have become callous and have given themselves up to sensuality, greedy to practice every kind of impurity.
A word of caution. We must not let this slippery slope begin. Later, on marks of a civilisation that has lost its way. KFkairosfocus
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
05:44 PM
5
05
44
PM
PDT
Q, I think it is excessive to say that I "attacked" you. At 299 I agreed that you had responded when I had said you hadn't, and at 300 you agreed, I think, that we should drop the discussion. Why are you bringing this back up?Viola Lee
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
05:10 PM
5
05
10
PM
PDT
Relatd: The complementary in heterosexual marriage means children are brought into the world.
By this logic, couples who know they are infertile and couples who don’t want to have children can’t get married. I hate to break it to you, but the church does not own marriage. It is a state institution and, as such, the state can decide what it is. Over the years, marriage has changed. Men no longer have the right to physically discipline their wives. Women no longer have to obey their husbands. In fact, same sex unions were performed by the church up until the 13th century.Sir Giles
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
05:01 PM
5
05
01
PM
PDT
Viola Lee, After attacking me personally, would you please respond to @297. Thank you, -QQuerius
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
04:59 PM
4
04
59
PM
PDT
Relatd: It’s called exercising their freedom of religion.
No, it’s called violating anti discrimination laws.Sir Giles
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
04:54 PM
4
04
54
PM
PDT
Seversky at 335, You still haven't gotten a clue. "In February 2022, the Vatican released statistics showing that in 2020 the number of Catholics in the world increased by 16 million to 1.36 billion." Do the research or I will get that Mega-Sock Launcher. relatd
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
04:50 PM
4
04
50
PM
PDT
SG at 330, "dragged into the future" hahahahahahahahaha Are you living "in the future" right now? It's called "the present." "3) Or the baker and florist who were sued for refusing to provide their services for a same sax marriage. "4) Or the county clerk who was pilloried in the media and social media for refusing to issue a wedding licence to a same sex couple." It's called exercising their freedom of religion.relatd
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
04:44 PM
4
04
44
PM
PDT
JVL at 329, Christians are not under the law Moses wrote. And why do you divert to clothes and dietary rules which have nothing to do with the subject? Same-sex marriage is not equivalent to one man, one woman marriage. The complementary in heterosexual marriage means children are brought into the world. In the case of a marriage where the woman finds out she cannot have children, the complementary still exists. I have a friend who is in that situation. I followed the legal efforts to create SSM. It could have been done differently and achieved a similar result, but this was rejected by those involved. They wanted to be considered the same as straight married couples. However, this is not possible since the sex organs are incompatible.relatd
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
04:40 PM
4
04
40
PM
PDT
In his new book Zombie Science, biologist Jonathan Wells asks a simple question: If the icons of evolution were just innocent textbook errors, why do so many of them still persist? [evolutionnews.org]
Wells himself is something of an iconoclast, railing against the tyranny of science’s Darwin-only advocates. His first book, Icons of Evolution, became an international hit by dismantling the outdated and underwhelming “proofs” of evolution that have littered textbooks for decades. For doing so, he was attacked by Darwin’s defenders and became one of the most hated figures of the intelligent design movement.
Origenes
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
03:42 PM
3
03
42
PM
PDT
TAMMIE LEE HAYNES/333
The decline of Christian belief can also be attributed to censorship and lies on the part of the Science establishment specifically and academia, government, and the media generally.
Of course, it must be a conspiracy of the all-powerful science establishment that is responsible for the decline, it couldn't possibly be that it is being discredited by the public behavior of some of it's most prominent figures and institutions.
Those who can make people believe absurdities, can make people commit atrocities.
-- Voltaire
Where in a Science publication, or media account, does one find this fact: That ALL the scientific evidence shows that life began through Divine inervention. And of course, Courts have held that it is illegal, indeed unconstiutional, to teach that fact in a public school. You got it, illegal to teach a scientific fact. And the Science establishemnt applauds
Divine intervention in the origin of life is not taught as a scientific fact in the science classes of public schools because it has not been established as a scientific fact. It is, therefore, unconstitutional to teach it as such. Creationism has a standing invitation to present evidence in support of its claim but has failed to do so thus far. The ball is in your court.
So we are given a theory, naturalisticc abiogenesis, which is as discredited as perpetual motion or phlogiston. Instead it is presented as the truth in virtually all basic biology textbooks, without ever a mention of its problems, when the truth is that it has ZERO evidence supporting it.
Do you have an example of a biology text-book which presents abiogenesis as a well-established theory or scientific fact?
Of course some BS science to prop up Atheism is not the number 1 problem with the lies fof our intellectual establishment.
The decline in church attendance suggests it is not Atheism which needs propping up.Seversky
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
03:12 PM
3
03
12
PM
PDT
TLH: The decline of Christian belief can also be attributed to censorship and lies on the part of the Science establishment specifically and academia, government, and the media generally.
The only thing wrong with this argument is that it does not conform to the evidence.Sir Giles
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
02:40 PM
2
02
40
PM
PDT
Dear Sir Giles @ 321 The decline of Christian belief can also be attributed to censorship and lies on the part of the Science establishment specifically and academia, government, and the media generally. Where in a Science publication, or media account, does one find this fact: That ALL the scientific evidence shows that life began through Divine inervention. And of course, Courts have held that it is illegal, indeed unconstiutional, to teach that fact in a public school. You got it, illegal to teach a scientific fact. And the Science establishemnt applauds So we are given a theory, naturalisticc abiogenesis, which is as discredited as perpetual motion or phlogiston. Instead it is presented as the truth in virtually all basic biology textbooks, without ever a mention of its problems, when the truth is that it has ZERO evidence supporting it. Of course some BS science to prop up Atheism is not the number 1 problem with the lies fof our intellectual establishment. Not when they tell us that it is okay to murder millions of unborn children,TAMMIE LEE HAYNES
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
02:21 PM
2
02
21
PM
PDT
F/N: On other matters regarding the course of our civilisation, it is not hard to see how we are blindly heading to disaster. As a minor sign, compare events in E Europe to those of the 1930's. There are many other signs that need to be heeded but are unlikely to be taken seriously by those who are caught up in the tides of the times. However, we would be well advised to heed Machiavelli, whose counsel was that political disasters are like hectic fever, easy to cure at first but hard to diagnose; but when the course becomes obvious to all, it is far too late to cure. At another time, I may point out some further signs. KFkairosfocus
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
01:15 PM
1
01
15
PM
PDT
JVL, you are rapidly painting yourself into a corner. It is by no means "condescending" to object to repeated unjustified, unsubstantiated blanket accusations that one is a generally incompetent reasoner and to lay out one's reasons then challenge the one making accusations to provide substance or in all reasonableness, withdraw the charge. KFkairosfocus
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
01:07 PM
1
01
07
PM
PDT
JVL@327, although we are centering on KF, he is by no means the only one with this “stuck in the past” pathology. It has been my experience that those who long for a past that never really existed ignore the fact that the only certainty in life is change. You can either try to understand and influence the change or you can rail against it. The difference between the two is that the latter is doomed to failure. Any time there is change, people are dragged into the future whether they like it or not. 1) There is the hotel manager who opposed civil rights by pouring acid into a white’s only pool when black people were swimming in it. 2) Or the bus driver that had Rosa Parks arrested for not moving to the back of the bus. 3) Or the baker and florist who were sued for refusing to provide their services for a same sax marriage. 4) Or the county clerk who was pilloried in the media and social media for refusing to issue a wedding licence to a same sex couple. 5) Or the movie executive who was charged for behaviours that were previously condoned. 6) Or the employee fired for behaviour that was previously condoned. All of these are extremely uncomfortable and unpleasant for those involved, but they serve an important purpose in the advancement of society. Although challenging, I would much rather live in modern society than in any previous decade. I was at a Christmas dinner last night for my office staff and their significant others. Two of the staff have same sex parters, who were welcomed just like anyone else would be. A couple decades ago, this would not be the case.Sir Giles
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
11:24 AM
11
11
24
AM
PDT
Relatd: People should reject perverse lifestyles. Perverse based on whose standard? Do you follow all the rules and injunctions in the Bible? Even the ones about not wearing clothing made from two different kinds of fabric? Or the one about not eating shellfish? Or the one about anyone who curses their parents must be killed? How do you know which laws to follow and which to reject?JVL
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
11:02 AM
11
11
02
AM
PDT
JVL at 327, "modern culture"? As opposed to two moths ago? People should reject perverse lifestyles. And by reject, I don't mean reject people, just reject the lifestyles. For the record, no one needs my permission to live how they want.relatd
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
10:40 AM
10
10
40
AM
PDT
Sir Giles: The best reason I can come up with for his doomsaying is that Christianity is on the decline and many of the persecutions permitted by the Bible are no longer acceptable by society. But that is just my opinion. He may very well have other reasons for his fears. I think, too, that his complete inability to accept some aspects of modern culture (same-sex marriage, same-sex sex, etc) means that he has clearly fallen behind the times but, if you can't move with the times, you end up falling back on what sound more and more like inflexible, fundamentalist views. That's all somewhat predictable. In Kairosfocus's case his inability to even utter (i.e. type) certain words just make him look like someone so out of touch with the modern world as to render himself completely ineffectual when trying to deal with current events. You can't just keep stamping your feet, insisting you're right, that we've learnt very little in the last 2000 years, and expect people to take you seriously or even listen to you. Couple that with an incredibly pompous and intentionally archaic rhetorical style and . . . well . . . people start tuning out. You do wonder if Kairosfocus and Bornagain77 actually think that anyone really reads their posts anymore? I bet they don't even read each others'.JVL
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
10:18 AM
10
10
18
AM
PDT
JVL, with reference to KF’s ”civilisation is headed for a cliff edge and a hard collision with realities being pretended away.” it has been pointed out to KF multiple times, by several people, that the evidence does not support his paranoia. Infant mortality down, life expectancy up, quality of life in old age improved, racial issues improved, no longer persecuting and prosecuting homosexuals and transgendered, ready access to birth control, better opportunities for women, decreased rates of violence, etc. The best reason I can come up with for his doomsaying is that Christianity is on the decline and many of the persecutions permitted by the Bible are no longer acceptable by society. But that is just my opinion. He may very well have other reasons for his fears.Sir Giles
December 18, 2022
December
12
Dec
18
18
2022
09:58 AM
9
09
58
AM
PDT
1 3 4 5 6 7 16

Leave a Reply