ID, intelligence, meaning, purpose.

[changed]

But you haven't shown how the first life was formed either. You don't know. You say because we don't know the physical mechanism, it is therefore design. That is god-of-the-gaps, plain and simple.

I have posted before, our agency is proof of where we came from - proof that life is eternal, with no beginning.

no beginning = agency.

beginning (like robots) = no agency = everything is controlled by how it was created.

As we know and observe it, life is formed by life -- not by design.

living things = design.

Right, life as we know and observe it is formed from life, not by design. This is a critical distinction because it follows that species are formed from other species -- not by design. Of course there is abundant fossil, molecular, and experimental evidence to support this line of reasoning. Never once has life been designed from scratch.

other species = design

life formed by life = design

if it were formed through laws/potentials, that would be different than design (although then you would have to figure out where the laws/potentials came from)

Wow. Actually genetic material doesn't look or function like a designed computer program, although analogies like this are useful for instructing neophites.

DNA is a computer program - except that unstead of being binary, it is a base 4 system, much more advanced than what we use.

[PacMan]

Tarski,

I don't know for certain if you are, but if you're an atheist I hope you will jump over and participate in my thread, the Naked Atheist. I think it is somewhat relevant.

PacMan

[changed]

LDS have a different view of creation btw - believe that God transforms what eternally exists, rather than created from nothingness...

that we are self-existent, without beginning, with agency.

God is cleaning up a mess He did not make so really, evolution or not? does not matter. The atoms in life look designed/artificially arranged to me though, if not, that is fine too... I just have not seen anything convincing that shows how atoms could arrange themselves like this without help...

[Tarski]

robots can move, but they do not have free will.

Do ants have free will? Viruses? They are alive aren't they? You are moving goal posts again--let's take one thing at a time: Is life without a spirit possible? Is it physical at it's root?

Yes, you can use RNG's, but everything they do roots back to their program - you can program them to teach themselves to walk etc. etc. this is done by giving a goal - try to get to x,y - then introduce random move, if this random move helped them save it, if not get rid of it, etc. etc. this is not agency -

And your proof that this is not also basically true for babies?

through their potentials. Snowflakes form now as they have always formed, at a precise T and P, their crystal structure is created because of the hydrogen bond - iron, ice, copper, the structures that these atoms form does not evolve with time because the potentials do not evolve...

Do you think you can predict the form of a given snowflake?

OK, so you just get to say "through their potentials". OK then that is my answer too.

Nothing in the dance of life has atoms behaving in ways that violate "their potentials". Actually, one must consider systems. The potential energy of a system of N atoms is a function also of the position of all N atoms.

We cannot even solve exactly the 3 body problem and now you are going to tell me you know what 10 to the 23 power atoms can do in a system they can even exchange energy with the environment. I think you have become a little ruined by the relatively simple rigidness of the world of solid homogeneous materials.

I know for a fact one cannot just throw the word "potentials" around and expect to explain Bernard convection cycles or even the unpredictable variety of snowflakes.

natural selection requires that a chunk of matter wants to survive,

[edit] Please don't take the Lord's name in vain even if it's in acronym form.

NO IT DOESN'T. It only requires that some mutations improve survival better than others. One celled animals and insects don't literally "want" anything. They have no explicit conscious thoughts, no explicit conscious plans.

Plants do not want a dang thing at all! They have no thoughts or hopes or desires at all.

What are the hopes and dreams of a mushroom Mr. Changed?

what makes it want to survive?

It doesn't. Evolution operates on the level of generations. The "desires" of a single animal at any given moment is not what drives the process. Plants are alive too. Mushrooms? Retroviruses? All full of longing to survive in your opinion?

a chunk of iron does not care if it is melted or solid, mixed or pure... it does not try to survive... so what makes a chunk of matter try to survive?

Well, of course, it isn't complex enough to have any behavior now is it. Even a plant does something that makes a difference for survival. On the other hand, an insect has behavior. This behavior is either conducive to survival or it isn't. If it isn't then that reflects a defect that will not likely be passed on since it will not likely succeed at at well at reproduction (or succeed at all).

A rng - I have used them myself. I would not call it self-organizing though, the programmer can predict the outcome, because the programmer defined the goals.

For the type of thing I am talking about the programmer could not predict a thing since the programmer cannot predict the environment. Neural nets can be designed to change in ways that are not straightforwardly predictable.

consciousness, intelligence, thoughts - these are not magical or supernatural substances. Do you deny that consciousness, intelligence, thoughts exist?

At the risk of creating confusion, I am tempted to say that yes I deny they exist. By this I mean that I deny that they exist in the way you think they do. If you think a robot could not be conscious even in principle, even in a million years, then that kind of consciousness I do deny. If you think that consciousness is nonphysical in any sense more mysterious than the sense in which a poem or musical composition is nonphysical, then I deny that any such thing exists. I realize that human intuitions are naturally prone to essentiallism and spiritualism (especially so for children) and that our inborn intuitions about mind suggest something nonphysical but concrete sort of like an energy or ghost. But they are mistaken just as our intuitions about time and space are mistaken, just as folk physics is often incorrect.

I certainly do not think that plants have minds or are conscious. Are they alive? Did they perhaps evolve?

[changed]

Yes, you can use RNG's, but everything they do roots back to their program - you can program them to teach themselves to walk etc. etc. this is done by giving a goal - try to get to x,y - then introduce random move, if this random move helped them save it, if not get rid of it, etc. etc. this is not agency -

And your proof that this is not also basically true for babies?

so you do not think you have agency? you must not have kids . We have three kids, and they have plenty of quirks that did not come from us . Our actions are not predictable because we have agency....

Do you think you can predict the form of a given snowflake?

OK, so you just get to say "through their potentials". OK then that is my answer too.

Nothing in the dance of life has atoms behaving in ways that violate "their potentials". Actually, one must consider systems. The potential energy of a system of N atoms is a function also of the position of all N atoms.

We cannot even solve exactly the 3 body problem and now you are going to tell me you know what 10 to the 23 power atoms can do in a system they can even exchange energy with the environment. I think you have become a little ruined by the relatively simple rigidness of the world of solid homogeneous materials.

I know for a fact one cannot just throw the word "potentials" around and expect to explain Bernard convection cycles or even the unpredictable variety of snowflakes.

you are right, non-living materials are simple. comparing living structures to a snowflake or a convection cell is like comparing an entire city filled with cars and buildings to a desert - there is no comparison at all. the motion of a couple moles of atoms is described using equations of state such as PV = nRT, for a given P,T, we know what state they will be in etc. etc.

Bernard convection cycles - just like boiling water, simple, you heat a liquid up, warm liquid rises, small imperfections on the bottom of the dish provide nucleation points, what is unpredictable about that?

Snowflakes are made out of water, and all have the same atomic crystal structure which do not evolve over time. Snowflakes now have the same structures as snowflakes which formed billions of years ago, nothing unpredictable...

Some of my research was looking at solidification, grain boundary formation. The vast majority of the atoms form a lattice structure - like these:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/solids/bravais.html

just a repeating structure. Where two crystals with different orientations come together, you get a mismatch of structures with surface energy that is proportional to the mismatch etc. etc. Grain sizes are determined by nucleation kinetics etc. etc.

In the non-living world, structures are either repetitive - cube after cube after cube after cube (not one cube containing different information than the other)

or you get something that is amorphous - completely random. So tell me, why does the structure of iron not evolve? A chunk of iron from a billion years ago has exactly the same crystal structure as a chunk of iron today.

something like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiconductor_device

does not form without help. even if you could make a bunch of p-n junctions capable of storing information, you would still have to infuse it with information. DNA isn't a simple p-n junction, it's a base 4 system that has been programmed with info...

OMG!!

NO IT DOESN'T. It only requires that some mutations improve survival better than others. One celled animals and insects don't literally "want" anything. They have no explicit conscious thoughts, no explicit conscious plans.

Plants do not want a dang thing at all! They have no thoughts or hopes or desires at all.

iron and copper do not want anything, and they do not evolve. If the structure of something can evolve without wanting anything, then iron, copper, tin, led - all of these would evolve over time.

For the type of thing I am talking about the programmer could not predict a thing since the programmer cannot predict the environment. Neural nets can be designed to change in ways that are not straightforwardly predictable.

Have you written codes? Do you know how they work? Robots do what they were programmed to do. If the environment changes, the robot still acts in acord to it's program. You are telling me that you could not predict a short circuit if the robot was put into a swimming pool?

At the risk of creating confusion, I am tempted to say that yes I deny they exist. By this I mean that I deny that they exist in the way you think they do. If you think a robot could not be conscious even in principle, even in a million years, then that kind of consciousness I do deny. If you think that consciousness is nonphysical in any sense more mysterious than the sense in which a poem or musical composition is nonphysical, then I deny that any such thing exists. I realize that human intuitions are naturally prone to essentiallism and spiritualism (especially so for children) and that our inborn intuitions about mind suggest something nonphysical but concrete sort of like an energy or ghost. But they are mistaken just as our intuitions about time and space are mistaken, just as folk physics is often incorrect.

I certainly do not think that plants have minds or are conscious. Are they alive? Did they perhaps evolve?

many think plants have evolved...

I have met others who believe that we are robots, with no agency. agency is what the premortal battle was fought over, satan did not want anyone to have agency, wanting to enslave everyone. God fought for agency. It's the same battle all over again - those who do not want to follow God claim not to have any agency, no personal responsibility, no willpower, no will - just puppets of their environment/programs. some human actions cannot be predicted because we are not puppets... at least some people are not puppets .

Human intuitions (especially children) are created by things that are real - we get thirsty because water is real, and we need water to survive. we get hungry because food exists and we need food to survive. we pursue spiritual matters for the same reason that we pursue water and food.

I am sorry that you think you are a robot without agency... I'm not sure what more there is to say to someone who thinks they are a puppet...

[cdowis]

Do ants have free will?

Thank you for asking.

Does a soldier in the North Korean army have free will when he is marching with his companions in perfect formation before his leaders? And the TV commentator when she gushes about the new leader for North Korea.

The answer is yes, ants do indeed have free will, but they, like the soldier, have perfect obedience as they go about their duty (e.g. Helaman chapter 12, Moses 7 -- the earth has a spirit and has free will).

Viruses? They are alive aren't they? You are moving goal posts again--let's take one thing at a time: Is life without a spirit possible? Is it physical at it's root?

All life, including mother earth, has a spirit. Spirit is indeed physical, made up of spiritual matter, more refined than regular matter. It's sad that you do not know the scriptures.

[changed]

yes, prove that ants do not have will.

Prove that people do not have agency...

people are stubborn, you can do everything possible to force them to think a certain way, or be a certain way... must not have kids, because anyone with kids knows they are impossible to control - because they have agency.

Dr. Viktor Frankl stated:

[cdowis]

deleted -- don't want to hijack this thread.

[semlogo]

http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play?&p=youtube+how+an+internal+combustion+engine+works&vid=166798360711&dt=1188457200&l=134&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts4.mm.bing.net%2Fvideos%2Fthumbnail.aspx%3Fq%3D166798360711%26id%3D88e3719e2e528a4b4b8ac67eea4f10cc%26bid%3Dkxd%252ffMPoTcf39g%26bn%3DThumb%26index%3Dch1%26url%3Dhttp%253a%252f%252fwww.youtube.com%252fwatch%253fv%253dV-z-R8Mv_HM&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DV-z-R8Mv_HM&***=How+a+Car++Engine++Works++%28Internal++Combustion++Eng...&sigr=11a5ts971&newfp=1

The above was designed - there is a valid explanation for where it came from - I don't just wave my hands in the air and say things like "it's complicated" or "it just randomly happened". The above was created, and can be fully explained by, real science.

Yes. It's a mechanical, non-living device made of metal. Thanks for the non sequitur, though.

no one has explained where the "slight modifications" come from - that is what I am asking.

Learn and return.

[semlogo]

cars and radios are made by a creator, and they do not think or evolve.

biology has not explained why mindless atoms can arrange themsevles into new strucutres. random mutations followed by natural selection? "it just randomly happens" is not a scientific answer for anything.

no one has provided an explanation/mechanism behind the changes except to wave their hands and say "it's complicated"... it's complicated is not a theory or an explanation.

I am asking a simple question, at the atomic level - what causes atoms to come together to form DNA, nerves, eyes, ears - explain the atomic potentials involved, the bonding involved, the atomic forces that cause this. Is that such a hard thing to ask? I can show you how a computer chip is made, and how a new metal is made, what conditions/potentials would lead to the creation of specific atomic structures - I can tell you why different materials behave differently, why some are brittle, some are strong, some are flexible -

so, at the atomic level, what causes atoms to form DNA strucutres - what potentials are involved? and what new conditions lead to new DNA strucutres? just answer the question? or can't you answer the question?

Organisms are self-replicating. Cars can't do that. Does that need intervention from a creator too? Does God get involved every time two squirrels mate? Seems like an awfully inefficient system there. An efficient designer would make a system that ran on its own - which would include a mechanism whereby organisms could adapt to their changing environment over time.

[changed]

Organisms are self-replicating. Cars can't do that. Does that need intervention from a creator too? Does God get involved every time two squirrels mate? Seems like an awfully inefficient system there. An efficient designer would make a system that ran on its own - which would include a mechanism whereby organisms could adapt to their changing environment over time.

Life begets life. The point is that life does not just spontaneously or randomly form, it is the product of intelligence. Like the words in a book, not just random letters, the words were written there by someone who can think, and can be read by someone who thinks. Baby squirrels are created with information, information that comes from living parents. It is not a mindless, random, undirected process is all I am trying to say.

God is not the only one with intelligence... squirrels can think and create too... the body of the squirrel was designed by, and is utilized by, something with intelligence.

like the little primary lesson, you have a glove, the glove is your body, your hand is the spirit, the body is limp and lifeless without the spirit in it... life requires a spirit, requires intelligence, requires something to direct bodily functions.

the mechanism whereby organisms can interact with their environment is spirit/intelligence/conscience/ call it what you will...

[semlogo]

Life begets life. The point is that life does not just spontaneously or randomly form, it is the product of intelligence. Like the words in a book, not just random letters, the words were written there by someone who can think, and can be read by someone who thinks. Baby squirrels are created with information, information that comes from living parents. It is not a mindless, random, undirected process is all I am trying to say.

God is not the only one with intelligence... squirrels can think and create too... the body of the squirrel was designed by, and is utilized by, something with intelligence.

like the little primary lesson, you have a glove, the glove is your body, your hand is the spirit, the body is limp and lifeless without the spirit in it... life requires a spirit, requires intelligence, requires something to direct bodily functions.

the mechanism whereby organisms can interact with their environment is spirit/intelligence/conscience/ call it what you will...

I hate to break this to you, but sexual reproduction is not the same as drawing a schematic and putting together the parts intelligently. Reproduction is instinctual, and the actual creation of life does not involve the intelligence of either of the two organisms - it's happens independently of their brains, at the cellular level.

[Tarski]

Thank you for asking.

Does a soldier in the North Korean army have free will when he is marching with his companions in perfect formation before his leaders? And the TV commentator when she gushes about the new leader for North Korea.

The answer is yes, ants do indeed have free will, but they, like the soldier, have perfect obedience as they go about their duty (e.g. Helaman chapter 12, Moses 7 -- the earth has a spirit and has free will).

All life, including mother earth, has a spirit. Spirit is indeed physical, made up of spiritual matter, more refined than regular matter. It's sad that you do not know the scriptures.

Seriously? I consider these answers to be incredible silly. The ants are free to misbehave but they just have way more self control than humans??!

What a picture, those little ants keeping themselves in line through immense willpower! LOL

Ants are little biological machines that react to the environment in rigid ways due to their biological "hard wiring".

A virus has as much free will as a thermostat and the earth itself is as much free will as a paperclip.

Much of what you come up with is just woolly thinking and Mormon speak. There isn't the tiniest bit of evidence for it or even conceptual clarity.

[lostindc]

Seriously? I consider these answers to be incredible silly. The ants are free to misbehave but they just have way more self control than humans??!

What a picture, those little ants keeping themselves in line through immense willpower! LOL

Ants are little biological machines that react to the environment in rigid ways due to their biological "hard wiring".

A virus has as much free will as a thermostat and the earth itself is as much free will as a paperclip.

Much of what you come up with is just woolly thinking and Mormon speak. There isn't the tiniest bit of evidence for it or even conceptual clarity.

Its amazing that these same ideas are propelled by near-death experiencers. But, then again, we mustn't read into what we cannot replicate or see with our own eyes (in other words, metaphysics is junk and has nothing to offer). Furthermore, where is the peer review process.

[cdowis]

Seriously? I consider these answers to be incredible silly.

"I have no interest in conducting a serious dialog with a brainless idiot who would propose such an idea."

OK, no problem.

[Tarski]

"I have no interest in conducting a serious dialog with a brainless idiot who would propose such an idea."

OK, no problem.

Who are you supposed to be quoting?

But anyway, I will say that there can be no serious discussion as long as such magical half-ideas are promoted. Some of the things you are saying almost don't even mean anything--so are they even ideas?

"The earth has a spirit". This borders on meaningless. At best it is a poetically evocative sentence. At worst it is magical thinking.

Recall, no one has given a clear explanation of just what a spirit is. After that, I would want to know why the earth has a spirit. What would a spiritless earth do differently than one with a spirit.

Does mars have a spirit? Does the moon? Does an asteroid? Does a rock? Does a hunk of doggie doo doo have spirit?

[cdowis]

As you have clearly stated, the concept of spirit and free will is outside the perview of science.

This is religion.

Such spiritual matters are incomprehensible to the atheists, who view such concepts as silly and useless. Mockery is the only response I could have expected from you.

[semlogo]

The concept of spirit and free will is outside the perview of science. This is religion.

Such spiritual matters are incomprehensible to the atheists, who view such concepts as silly and useless. Mockery is the only response I could have expected.

The question is why are you trying to discuss non-scientific, unprovable concepts in a discussion about science?

[Tarski]

The concept of spirit and free will is outside the perview of science. This is religion.

Such spiritual matters are incomprehensible to the atheists, who view such concepts as silly and useless. Mockery is the only response I could have expected from you.

Well, I wasn't always an atheist and I certainly remember hearing and repeating such nonsense when I was quite young and less discriminating.

Can you make a meaningful sentence or two explaining it to a sober person so that this person could be sure you weren't just throwing words around? Can you make any kind of sense out of the earth having a spirit and the reason it does?

[lostindc]

Well, I wasn't always an atheist and I certainly remember hearing and repeating such nonsense when I was quite young and less discriminating.

Can you make a meaningful sentence or two explaining it to a sober person so that this person could be sure you weren't just throwing words around? Can you make any kind of sense out of the earth having a spirit and the reason it does?

Can you make any sense out of why we have this condition called love, yet we do...Can you make any sense out of why we can point a box, click a button, and have a picture, or that our voices can be carried across the world via little boxes we hold to our ears. None of it appears sensible, especially to those prior to the technology. Yet it occurs. There is no such thing as absolutely logical.

[semlogo]

Can you make any sense out of why we have this condition called love, yet we do...Can you make any sense out of why we can point a box, click a button, and have a picture, or that our voices can be carried across the world via little boxes we hold to our ears. None of it appears sensible, especially to those prior to the technology. Yet it occurs. There is no such thing as absolutely logical.

None of those things is mysterious.

[lostindc]

None of those things is mysterious.

Feel free to explain and then I will begin asking the "why's"

[semlogo]

Feel free to explain and then I will begin asking the "why's"

Knock yourself out.

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/articles/article/clairemcloughlincolumn1.htm/

http://www.howstuffworks.com/tv.htm

http://www.howstuffworks.com/cell-phone.htm

[lostindc]

Knock yourself out.

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/articles/article/clairemcloughlincolumn1.htm/

http://www.howstuffworks.com/tv.htm

http://www.howstuffworks.com/cell-phone.htm

I stopped at the first article. I don't understand WHY

[asbestosman]

I stopped at the first article. I don't understand WHY

Why is a very interesting question. When one receives an answer to the question of why, he can simply ask why that answer holds. This technique is so powerful that four-year olds routinely use it much to the disturbance of their parents.