Yes, they all end up being related and here’s how: Yesterday evening, gpuccio published “Mechanosensing and Mechanotransduction: how cells touch their world here,” on the extracellular matrix (ECM) by which a cell communicates with its environment.
A reader wrote,
Great ……. The only explanation that is scientific and logic is that all of this awesome activities are directed and guided by God , no other explanation is possible since the information needed to construct biostructures are not contained in nature or the cosmic laws.
and gpuccio replied:
Welcome to the discussion and thank you for your comment.
I just want to clarify that my argument about ID as applied to biology is about the design inference. It clearly infers design interventions by come conscious, intelligent and purposeful agent. From a purely scientific point of view, no statement about God is needed, at least IMO. That remains a philosophical or religious problem.
I absolutely agree that “the information needed to construct biostructures are not contained in nature or the cosmic laws.” That’s exactly why a design inference is absolutely needed to provide a credible explanation.
No law and no contingency can explain complex functional information. Conscious, intelligent and purposeful design can. That’s why the design inference is absolutely warranted when complex functional information is observed.
And, when it is observed in the huge amounts implied by the systems described in the OP, I can’t really imagine how any sensible person can deny the inference of design.
But, of course, they can and they will.
If the only reasonable inference about life is design, does design entail the adoption of a cosmology that includes a specific doctrine of God? gpuccio is surely right to say that the evidence of design, as such, cannot do that. Doctrines of God rely on other bases as well.
The evidence from design rules out some doctrines (naturalist atheism, for example) but does not thereby establish alternatives (Judaism, Buddhism, for example). Adherents to any serious version of these faiths accept design as a given but point to other factors to establish their specific claims.
Which brings us to theoretical physicist Michio Kaku. Recently, a friend asked whether he believed in God, based on the following from June 8, 2016:
Kaku, the Henry Semat Chair and Professorship in theoretical physics at the City College of New York, has published more than 70 articles in physics journals on topics such as supersymmetry, superstring theory, supergravity, and hadronic physics.
His latest claim is likely to make waves in the world of science.
“I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence,” Kaku said, as quoted by the Geophilosophical Association of Anthropological and Cultural Studies. “To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.” Jon Miltimore , Intellectual Takeout More.
Here’s Miltimore’s source:
Barbara Hollingsworth, “String Theory Co-Founder: Sub-Atomic Particles Are Evidence the Universe Was Created” at CNS
Here’s Hollingsworth’s source:
According to the physical, observing the behavior of these tachyons in several experiments, concluded that humans lived in a kind of “Matrix”, ie, a world governed by laws and principles conceived by a kind of great smart architect . “I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence, not unlike a favorite computer game, but of course, more complex and unthinkable,” said the scientist.”Scientist Michio Kaku surprised with finding irrefutable evidence: God does exist” at NOVA Evolution May 20, 2015
Dr. Kaku clarified his comments in 2018:
“Science is based on what is testable, reproducible, and falsifiable,” Kaku says. “That’s called ‘science.’ However, there are certain things that are not testable, not reproducible, and not falsifiable. And that would include the existence of God.” He’s noted that discerning whether you live in a Matrix-style construct or not would be another such ‘non-falsifiable’ problem…
In any event, when asked about God, Kaku is likely to quote Einstein’s suggestion that there are two types of god: “One god is a personal god, the god that you pray to, the god that smites the Philistines, the god that walks on water. That’s the first god. But there’s another god, and that’s the god of Spinoza. That’s the god of beauty, harmony, simplicity.”
It’s that second “God” to which Kaku is drawn. He tells innovation tech today that the universe could have been random, but that instead “Our universe is rich; it is beautiful, elegant.” Robby Berman, “Michio Kaku believes in God, if not that God” at Big Think
He goes on to talk about the “exquisite simplicity” of the laws of physics as well.
So yes and no. Kaku believes in God as demonstrated by order and design as opposed to randomness and chaos. If that ever becomes a problem for him, science has even bigger difficulties than we have supposed.
What we can’t do is go from that to Buddha’s Fire Sermon or the Ten Commandments. These other sources assume the background of a universe that shows design but are answering different questions. Hope this clarifies matters.
Follow UD News at Twitter!
See also: Why AI won’t wipe out humanity? (Michiko Kaku)
and
Mechanosensing and Mechanotransduction: how cells touch their world