Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,488 Year: 3,745/9,624 Month: 616/974 Week: 229/276 Day: 5/64 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A proper understanding of logical fallacies will improve the quality of debate
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1489 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


(1)
Message 88 of 344 (641116)
11-16-2011 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by mike the wiz
11-16-2011 3:51 PM


Re: Affirming the Consequent
1. Code. Syntax. (It has to have a meaningful code)
2. Pragmatics. There has to be meaning to the code.
Well, if you insist, but you must be aware then that these aren't present in DNA; they're present only in our representations ("ATGC") of DNA. DNA doesn't actually contain letters; it contains chemical structures that we describe with letters. It doesn't contain "syntax", our representations of it do. DNA no more has syntax than a snowflake encodes the number "6".
DNA isn't a "code", we represent it as a code. What DNA is is a chemical structure that, when it reacts with another chemical structure, produces a third chemical structure.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by mike the wiz, posted 11-16-2011 3:51 PM mike the wiz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by mike the wiz, posted 11-16-2011 4:14 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1489 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


(1)
Message 99 of 344 (641139)
11-16-2011 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by mike the wiz
11-16-2011 4:14 PM


Re: Affirming the Consequent
For example, if what you are saying is true, then the structure you get from DNA, for an arm would not be
An arm.
It would be;
Na rma.
But it is. On the other side of my body.
The syntax is what is used in CATG.
No, it's not. What is used is the fact that an aminoacyl- tRNA has a binding anticodon that is three bases long. It doesn't say "AUG" on the end of it; it has the bases adenine, uracil, and guanine and those form hydrogen bonds with the bases cytosine, adenine, and uracil at the A site of the ribosome.
When we represent that process using letters like A, U, or G, when we describe that stochastic chemical process as a "code", that's when DNA has "syntax."
The syntax is the CATG, (four elements) it has pragmatics, because otherwise you could scramble any combination and get the same thing.
Not at all. There are many things that are not "codes" that nonetheless require specific relationships in space, exclude some configurations, and produce something different when you scramble them. Freeze ice in one way and it forms the traditional hexagonal crystal. Freeze the exact same water somewhere else, under slightly different conditions, and now ice forms in the extremely rare cubic crystal. Freeze it under different circumstances and it adopts a third completely different form. But ice doesn't contain "syntax", codes, or pragmatic meaning about ice crystals - it simply follows physical laws. Chemical laws.
DNA doesn't have codes or syntax, but the ways that we describe it do. Our representations of DNA have code and syntax because they're for human use. DNA is simply a chemical that follows chemical laws.
I would say it is unrealistic to say it is not information, when it fulfills the criteria
I'm not saying that DNA doesn't contain information. I'm saying that DNA doesn't contain information as you have chosen to define it. DNA doesn't contain codes, syntax, or meaning. Our representations of DNA are full of meaning.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by mike the wiz, posted 11-16-2011 4:14 PM mike the wiz has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024