Friday, February 9, 2007

law/life -> information/processing system -> mind

Before there is even any discussion of random mutation of information causing evolution, three systems must already exist. An information storage system, an information processing system, and a replication system must be present.

Information can not exist alone, for it is the compatible information processing system which defines the information as such by converting it into a functioning, interrelated system. And, of course an information processing system can not be defined as such if there is no information to process. Then, given these two preceeding systems, there still can not be any evolution of the information unless a replication system is tagged on within the lifetime of the information processing system.

Moreover, is there any reasonably scientifically valid inference to the above three systems being “randomly accidentally actualized?” Is there even any need to postulate such an unreasonable accident? Then,is there any scientific testable and repeatable and predictable method of discovering if at least an information storage and processing system (even leaving out the replication system for now) will randomly organize itself?

Finally, why even postulate such unreasonable, improbable events when we already know that information (sign systems) is a subsystem of mind (refer to Albert Voie’s peer reviewed published article) and that the universe and its natural laws behave as if it were a computer programmed from information (discussed by almost every phycisist [including anti-IDers]). Add onto this, the fact that every law within a program is the result of a foundation of information and every example we see of information arises from a mind. So, since the UK professor for the public understanding of science (Dawkins)tells us, the public, that we shouldn’t create improbable explanations when prefectly plausible ones already exist, then the most reasonable scientific explanation for an information processing system is an intelligent mind.

Now, our next scientific goal is to discover how life was programmed to come into existence within the larger program of the universe. Who knows, maybe the information underlying our natural laws had something to do with it.

And who said that ID was an unscientific argument from ignorance which stifles further scientific research?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

here is more on "information."

2 comments:

William Bradford said...

A good blog. The existence of information rich nucleic acids alone would support a case for intelligent design.

Zachriel said...

CJYman: "Before there is even any discussion of random mutation of information causing evolution, three systems must already exist.

The existence of such systems are not merely assumed, but observed. As there is currently no valid theory of abiogenesis, the Theory of Evolution only concerns how life changes over time.

CJYman: "An information storage system, an information processing system, and a replication system must be present.

They could all conceivably be a single system. Self-replicating molecules is a confirmed prediction of the abiogenetic hypothesis.

The rest of your post concerns the impossibility of abiogenesis, few scientists would agree with that assertion but consider it an open question.