Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

How can we measure specified complexity?

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

A friend asked about this common intelligent design concept. Specified complexity, also called complex specified information (CSI):

Life shows evidence of complex, aperiodic, and specified information in its key functional macromolecules, and the only other example we know of such function-specifying complex information are artifacts designed by intelligent agents. A chance origin of life would exceed the universal probability bound (UPB) set by the scope of the universe; hence design is a factor in the origin and development of life. Contrary to a commonly encountered (and usually dismissive) opinion, this concept is neither original to Dr Dembski nor to the design theory movement. Its first recognized use was by noted Origin of Life researcher, Leslie Orgel, in 1973:

Living organisms are distinguished by their specified complexity. Crystals fail to qualify as living because they lack complexity; mixtures of random polymers fail to qualify because they lack specificity. [ L.E. Orgel, 1973. The Origins of Life. New York: John Wiley, p. 189.

The concept of complex specified information helps us understand the difference between (a) the highly informational, highly contingent aperiodic functional macromolecules of life and (b) regular crystals formed through forces of mechanical necessity, or (c) random polymer strings. In so doing, they identified a very familiar concept — at least to those of us with hardware or software engineering design and development or troubleshooting experience and knowledge. Furthermore, on massive experience, such CSI reliably points to intelligent design when we see it in cases where we independently know the origin story. More.

Here are some suggested resources:

Bill Dembski: Specification: The Pattern That Signifies Intelligence

Kirk K Durston et al. Measuring the functional sequence complexity of proteins

Winston Ewert at Evolutionary Informatics

Robert M. Hazen et al. Functional information and the emergence of biocomplexity (public access) A friend notes, “Functional information, as outlined by Hazen et al., can be a measure of specified complexity, where the specificity supplies the functional constraint.”

Robert M. Hazen et al. Functional Information and the Emergence of Biocomplexity pdf (book)

Note: Another term used around here is irreducible complexity:

Irreducible Complexity, IC — A system performing a given basic function is irreducibly complex if it includes a set of well-matched, mutually interacting, nonarbitrarily individuated parts such that each part in the set is indispensable to maintaining the system’s basic, and therefore original, function. The set of these indispensable parts is known as the irreducible core of the system. (Dembski, No Free Lunch, p. 285

See also: Could a signature of specified complexity help us find alien life?

or

A Tutorial on Specified Complexity

Comments
DonJohnsonDD682, rvb8: Google DeepMind just learned how to walk; clumsily, idiosyncratically; in a simple simulated environment. per Wikipedia:
DeepMind Technologies' goal is to "solve intelligence", which they are trying to achieve by combining "the best techniques from machine learning and systems neuroscience to build powerful general-purpose learning algorithms"
This is all assuming the hardware to walk is all in place, and is simply trying to produce a system that can emulate what any baby can do: learn to walk. So, our most sophisticated learning algorithms have yet to fully emulate a basic application of these systems; I doubt they'd confidently turn them against the problem of engineering them from the bottom up. And yet, Darwin stated that something among the simplest and dumbest of learning algorithms, something you'd pass up faster than a bubble sort in general software engineering, did all that work. So why did Google spend the money acquiring DeepMind if Darwin had it all figured out more than a century ago? Too obscure?LocalMinimum
August 11, 2017
August
08
Aug
11
11
2017
07:25 AM
7
07
25
AM
PDT
@3 rvb8,I used to be pretty credulous regarding ID, but off the wall criticisms like your own got me interested in the field.EricMH
August 11, 2017
August
08
Aug
11
11
2017
07:19 AM
7
07
19
AM
PDT
rvb8: It seems you are incapable of seeing and understanding things clearly because your vision is clouded with many years of atheistic/materialistic indoctrination. Much like color blind people are incapable of seeing and enjoying the full range of color in our visual spectrum. But you are capable of much more. I suggest you watch this video, and many others like it, to see the possibilities. And don't reject it without some serious self questioning as to how it may apply to you. https://youtu.be/zddFs2i5km4 Best Regards, donDonJohnsonDD682
August 11, 2017
August
08
Aug
11
11
2017
06:40 AM
6
06
40
AM
PDT
Don@9 Thanks rvb8 for the added stimulation in thought. You see there is more, much more than gushing about the complexity of physiological systems -- much more. It's about following the design intuition in particular phenomena we see in nature and then using the knowledge gained in that exploration to see what, if anything, may be developed in the human sphere to mimic the unfolding design for the hopefully beneficial use in our world. For example, it seems most probable that animal navigation and migration has much to do about the animal's capacity to navigate using the earth's magnetic fields. And such is the case and scientific research projects are indeed ongoing to develop GPS-like navigational devices, but without the satellites. Another example are those who have followed the design intuition to tease out the details of the hearing mechanism of the inner ear and have developed the Cochlear Implant. Then there is the ongoing research into the design of DNA and how it can be used to store and retrieve massive amounts of information. This would not be possible without an understanding of the design of DNA. Then there are the 81 articles by Dr. Howard Glicksman detailing the many designs extant in the human body allowing it to function in a wide variety of purposeful ways -- this is where the double play imagery comes into play. You can brouse through his articles at - https://evolutionnews.org/2017/03/designed-body-engineered-system-displaying-irreducible-complexity-steroids/ This detailed knowledge of how various parts and functions of the body operate brings healing and comfort to many in the form of the medical profession. Pray tell, how did your curiosity evolve? How did your intellect evolve to the point where you and I can debate these things? And, yes we can look with much admiration and awe at the work of that smashing Designer.DonJohnsonDD682
August 11, 2017
August
08
Aug
11
11
2017
05:14 AM
5
05
14
AM
PDT
> ‘Incredulity’, as an argument needs to be used less here at UD. Looking forward to seeing you putting that into practice!Mung
August 11, 2017
August
08
Aug
11
11
2017
02:57 AM
2
02
57
AM
PDT
Thanks rvb8DonJohnsonDD682
August 11, 2017
August
08
Aug
11
11
2017
01:34 AM
1
01
34
AM
PDT
Don @6, 'Incredulity', as an argument needs to be used less here at UD. There are only so many times you can gush, about the complexity of physiological systems in the human body before someone says; 'and now what?' At this point ID says; 'oh nothing, it's just so breahtakingly complex, isn't the Designer smashing?' Sorry! My curiosity is more evolved than that lazy approach.rvb8
August 11, 2017
August
08
Aug
11
11
2017
12:57 AM
12
12
57
AM
PDT
rvb8 - UPB is just a very small p-value. It has so many stars they should use a galaxy as a symbol for it.Bob O'H
August 11, 2017
August
08
Aug
11
11
2017
12:52 AM
12
12
52
AM
PDT
rvb8 Absolutely stunning and deep analysis on your part. Guess you've never witnessed a double play or watched a skilled skateboarder flow down the sidewalk with ease, thanks in part to those wonderfully designed inner-ear balance mechanisms coupled in systems fashion to the brain, nerves and muscles.DonJohnsonDD682
August 11, 2017
August
08
Aug
11
11
2017
12:46 AM
12
12
46
AM
PDT
Don @4, Mildly Unassuming Complex Kineticisim, or MUCK. Defined broadly as (whatever the hell I want), trivial points, supported by obscure persons, living in worlds of their own making. The 'kineticisim', refers to the percieved movement (apparent progress) of said organisation, a kind of warped reality that exists in their own univese. The 'Mildly Unassuming Complex', refers to the basic harmlessness of these beliefs; for 'beliefs' they are. MUCK, is more generally defined as, psudo-language, created to give a veneer of sciencyness.rvb8
August 11, 2017
August
08
Aug
11
11
2017
12:23 AM
12
12
23
AM
PDT
Massively Complex Synchronicity (MCS). How's that for jargon? But it accurately describes the human body in terms of its many, many interrelated and necessary parts. For most of us, our eyes fog over when trying to follow the technical language of micro-biology such as satb1 & satb2, probability arguments etc. But we can easily understand 'irreducible complexity' or 'specified complexity' when brought up to the level of body parts such as organs, limbs, bones, muscles etc. We see, for example, the designed functionality of jointed and muscled arms when we simply reach down to pick up a small child, or watching a perfectly executed double play in baseball. If we think of these things called arms and legs as levers created to accomplish a variety of work functions, it is much easier for the layman to grasp the design argument rather than trying to visualize a very long 'deep time' scenario as to how an arm or leg may have developed from the fin of a fish or whale. And we all have, or will, experience the pain and suffering when an integral and necessary part of our body begins to fail. Those who have had heart attacks for example, realize very personally, the part the heart plays in this thing called 'irreducible complexity.' Arguing the merits or demerits of concepts such as 'irreducible complexity' at the cellular level is interesting, but at that level it is easy to hide behind the technical training and education needed to explain in kindergarten language, that which applies equally well at the higher level of body parts and organs. So this so called Mumbo Jumbo jargon has real minute by minute meaning when I apply it to my own body.DonJohnsonDD682
August 10, 2017
August
08
Aug
10
10
2017
11:45 PM
11
11
45
PM
PDT
EricMH @ 2, clarity? What the hell is UPB? A quick search gives me; 1) Uninon of Poles in Belarus. 2) Unique Percieved Benefit. 3) Universal Powerline Bus. 4) University of Paderborn. 5) University of Pittesburgh at Bradford. 6) University of POLITEHNICA at Bucharest. etc In fact UPB brings up many things except Universal Probability Bounds. Why is this? Is it perhaps because it is jargon? Made up? Unknown outside the bounds of the ID community? Much like Specified Complexity, UPB appears to be Mumbo Jumbo, for a 'specified' audience. The 'neologisms' of ID are well known, and weak, keep at it. If enough muck is flung, something may indeed stick.rvb8
August 10, 2017
August
08
Aug
10
10
2017
10:48 PM
10
10
48
PM
PDT
I own a copy of Evolutionary Informatics and I highly recommend it for clarity.EricMH
August 10, 2017
August
08
Aug
10
10
2017
03:08 PM
3
03
08
PM
PDT
Perhaps this provides a hint? https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/interesting-proteins-dna-binding-proteins-satb1-and-satb2/Dionisio
August 10, 2017
August
08
Aug
10
10
2017
01:59 PM
1
01
59
PM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply