Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 82 (8972 total)
169 online now:
LionFluit, PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat) (3 members, 166 visitors)
Newest Member: Howyoudo
Post Volume: Total: 875,373 Year: 7,121/23,288 Month: 1,027/1,214 Week: 39/303 Day: 0/39 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   NvC-1: What is the premise of Naturalism in Biology?
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4977
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 196 of 240 (876547)
05-22-2020 2:52 AM
Reply to: Message 194 by WookieeB
05-22-2020 12:17 AM


So what?

I was agreeing with you. You take offence at that?

Without being embodied in some form of physical system information does not exist.

There are some key words in there.... but again, so what?

Because the point needs to be emphasized that though the *content* of information is not dependant on the physical media the very *existence* of that information is.


Factio Republicana delenda est.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by WookieeB, posted 05-22-2020 12:17 AM WookieeB has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18096
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 197 of 240 (876553)
05-22-2020 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 190 by WookieeB
05-21-2020 7:11 PM


Wookie B writes:

Of course it would still exist as information for whatever creature mind is thinking it.


It would exist only IN the mind of whatever was thinking it. Information is a product of mind. The same reality becomes very different information in the mind of a human and the mind of an ant.

Wookie B writes:

But if matter is all there is, and there really is no information, then there is also no consciousness, mathematics, science, and any other concept.


Consciousness, mathematics, science, etc. are STATES of the matter within the mind. They are how the brain rearranges itself accoding to input from the senses.

Wookie B writes:

DNA has a purpose to store and transmit information.


Like water has a purpose to run downhill? That's a function, a behaviour. What you imagine as a "purpose" is just the result it happens to have.

Wookie B writes:

The message is instantiated on matter of course.


But how? What is the medium? What is the message made of? How would you distinguish matter that carries a message from matter that does not?

Wookie B writes:

The information itself is not dependent on the matter.


The information is dependent on the matter in the medium in which it is stored, minds, paper and ink, etc. Erase every copy from the matter and the information is gone with no way to get it back.

Wookie B writes:

And yet, there still is a message!


You remind me of my brother when he was young. You could show him six ways from Sunday that something wasn't true and his response would be, "But I think it is."

"I'm Fallen and I can't get up!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by WookieeB, posted 05-21-2020 7:11 PM WookieeB has not yet responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 5372
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 198 of 240 (876555)
05-22-2020 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by dwise1
05-22-2020 2:12 AM


dwise1 writes:

No, that is not information, but rather that is data. Data is not information.

Data is information.
Here is the definition of data from this web site. Definition of Data
It defines data.

quote:
information, especially facts or numbers, collected to be examined and considered and used to help decision-making, or information in an electronic form that can be stored and used by a computer:

The mind simply interprets data or information.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by dwise1, posted 05-22-2020 2:12 AM dwise1 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 199 by ringo, posted 05-22-2020 3:23 PM GDR has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18096
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 199 of 240 (876561)
05-22-2020 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by GDR
05-22-2020 12:40 PM


GDR writes:

Data is information.


I was taught that data was a collection of observations and information is data that has been analyzed, interpreted, etc. so that it "means" something.

The raw data is a perception of reality and the information is an interpretation of the perception. All in the mind.


"I'm Fallen and I can't get up!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by GDR, posted 05-22-2020 12:40 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by GDR, posted 05-22-2020 4:40 PM ringo has responded

  
Richard L. Wang
Member
Posts: 49
From: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Joined: 04-27-2020


Message 200 of 240 (876563)
05-22-2020 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Admin
05-20-2020 9:52 AM


Re-Admin(151): My response to feedback
Admin(151) writes:

I'm gaining the strong impression that you do not want to engage with most of the feedback people are providing you. You've responded to only 16 of 60 replies to you, about 25%.

When Admin wrote Admin(151), there were 62 (not 60) replies to my messages.

I want not to count JonF(150) replied to RLW(149), because from I submitting RLW(149) to Admin(151) replying RLW(149), only half hour past. I skip 4 replies dwise1(5&70&85&112), because in “Topic: The opponent of Creationism …”, RLW(26) asked dwise1 to keep discussion civil, “please stop doing so again. If you insist on doing so, I can only ignore all your posts, even if there are good ideas.” Please see dwise1(29) in “Topic: The opponent of Creationism …”, and dwise1(NvC-1-5). Therefore,

The total messages I need to reply is 57;
The total messages I replied is 33;
There are 17 messages, which were replied by Gen-Reply or may not need to be replied for different reasons;
There are 7 messages, that need replying but were not replied: AZPaul3(39), JonF(49&50&72), ringo(63), Dr Adequate(65) and PaulK(86). Sorry for that, especially for JonF. In RLW(7) of “Topic: The opponent of Creationism …”, I asked people’s understanding that I’m unable to reply all the replies as I type very slow.

Percy: look at my next message, please.

Replying messages:
--------------------------
(13)2 Re – (PaulK(6) & AZPaul3(4))
(18)1 Re – ringo(14)
(20)1 Re – PaulK(6)
(29)1 Re – 11(RAZD)
(30)1 Re – 19(PaulK)
(31)4 Re-25(PaulK) & (Tangle(7), RAZD(11), jar(27))
(43)6 Re – 28/40(Stile) & 24(JonF)&36(Tangle)&39(AZPaul3) & (Stile(10))
(44)1 Re - 41(RAZD)
(54)2 Re-46(PaulK)&47(ringo)
(67)3 Re – Tangle(56&58&61)
(68)1 Re –PaulK(55)
(69)1 Re –RAZD(59)
(76)1 Re-GDR(64)
(NC-2-4)1 (Re-GDR(64)&AZPaul3(78)) – GDR(64) is double replied
(97&103)1 Re-Percy(91)
(107)1 Re-GDR(92)
(108)1 Re-PaulK(94)
(109)1 Re-Dr Adequate(95)
(127)1 Re-Stile(90)
(128)1 Re-RAZD(98)
(149)1 Re-Admin(114)
-----------------
Total number of messages replied = 33
(Stile(10)) means that Stile(10) did not appear in the title of the reply message.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Admin, posted 05-20-2020 9:52 AM Admin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by ringo, posted 05-22-2020 3:58 PM Richard L. Wang has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18096
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 201 of 240 (876564)
05-22-2020 3:58 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by Richard L. Wang
05-22-2020 3:49 PM


Re: Re-Admin(151): My response to feedback
Maybe spend less time analyzing what you need to reply to and more time replying.

"I'm Fallen and I can't get up!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by Richard L. Wang, posted 05-22-2020 3:49 PM Richard L. Wang has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by Richard L. Wang, posted 05-22-2020 4:03 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
Richard L. Wang
Member
Posts: 49
From: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Joined: 04-27-2020


Message 202 of 240 (876565)
05-22-2020 4:01 PM


What is a good topic?
I proposed two new topics, but failed.

NvC-2: Information is independent of matter
------------------------------------------------------------
I’m used to thinking science issues, but I don’t know how this Forum works. What’s more, I hardly spend time to understand how this Forum works, even after GDR(92) kindly reminded me. I did not reply to Admin(NvC-2-3) in time, while I continued to submit my different posts to this NvC-2 un-threaded topic, so Admin closed it.

NvC-3: What is life made of
-------------------------------------
After thinking for the past two days, I realized that the premises are unnecessary for both Naturalism and my Creationism (I don’t explain further detail, because I don’t think anyone is interested in it). This is my important result from the discussion/debate here. Thank you all. I’ll revise my book to remove all paragraphs relevant to premise. This proposed topic caused a lot of controversy, and I did not response to Admin(114) in time.

I’m sorry to you all for wasting your time because of my mistake.

However, we still need a topic in order to set a narrow focus and continue our discussion/debate. Here is my suggestion. Based on the feedback, I’ll decide whether to submit. I don’t want to give Admin any more trouble.

NvC-4: Do all biological processes follow the natural laws?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The mainstream biology claims that all biological processes follow the natural laws. On the other hand, I think that the non-material elements in organisms don’t follow the natural laws, so the biological processes related to non-material elements don’t follow the natural laws.

Note 1 – I call the view that “all biological processes follow the natural laws” as Neo-Darwinian-Naturalism. Anyone can disagree with this name, and call the idea that “all biological processes follow the natural laws” as Materialism, or Whatever-ism. “All biological processes follow the natural laws” is a scientific proposition, its correctness can be tested by evidence, and how to name it is just a common agreement;
Note 2 – There is no assumption that “all biological processes follow the natural laws” is correct or not. One can think of this as a conclusion based on facts, while the other can say no. This is exactly what we are going to discuss/debate;
Note 3 – The non-material elements in organisms include genetic-information, language, knowledge, belief, cognition, mind, etc. If you like, you can discuss about all these non-material elements. I will restrict my discussion/debate to genetic-information, because the research related to genetic-information belongs to empirical science. Genetic-information can be measured, tested, modified and calculated. In a word, all the conclusions related to genetic-information must be supported by evidence. As a result, it is more likely to lead to meaningful discussions/debates.


Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by PaulK, posted 05-22-2020 4:16 PM Richard L. Wang has responded

  
Richard L. Wang
Member
Posts: 49
From: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Joined: 04-27-2020


Message 203 of 240 (876566)
05-22-2020 4:03 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by ringo
05-22-2020 3:58 PM


Re-ringo(63&202): Neo-Darwinism
See Neo-Darwinism – Wikipedia, please. “Neo-Darwinism is generally used to describe any integration of Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection with Gregor Mendel's theory of genetics.” Sorry for replying late and thank for your suggestion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by ringo, posted 05-22-2020 3:58 PM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
Richard L. Wang
Member
Posts: 49
From: Ottawa, ON, Canada
Joined: 04-27-2020


Message 204 of 240 (876567)
05-22-2020 4:07 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by AZPaul3
05-07-2020 8:31 PM


Re-AZPaul3(39): Naturalism in Biology
Sorry for replying late. RLW(32) discussed the premise of Naturalism in Biology. Now, I understand that the theoretical structure of my creationism can be simplified by removing this premise, see RLW(202). So, I think it is unnecessary to continue discussing this point. I see you, GDR and others continue discussing many interesting issues, and I like to join your discussion soon. Sorry again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by AZPaul3, posted 05-07-2020 8:31 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16184
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.1


Message 205 of 240 (876570)
05-22-2020 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 202 by Richard L. Wang
05-22-2020 4:01 PM


Re: What is a good topic?
quote:
The mainstream biology claims that all biological processes follow the natural laws. On the other hand, I think that the non-material elements in organisms don’t follow the natural laws, so the biological processes related to non-material elements don’t follow the natural laws.

That is definitely a philosophical topic, not a scientific one. Information, as you have it, is definitely an abstract object and the nature of abstracts is one that philosophers have argued over for millennia. See this article for some discussion of the matter: platonism

quote:
so the biological processes related to non-material elements don’t follow the natural laws.

Are there any such biological processes ? And if there are, wouldn’t they be founded on material elements and would therefore follow the natural laws for that reason. (I suspect that you fail to understand the concept of supervenience given your contradictory claims in your NvC-2 proposal)

I agree with restricting the discussion to genetic information since that is much better understood than the other things that you list.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by Richard L. Wang, posted 05-22-2020 4:01 PM Richard L. Wang has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by Richard L. Wang, posted 05-23-2020 4:17 PM PaulK has responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 5372
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 206 of 240 (876571)
05-22-2020 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by ringo
05-22-2020 3:23 PM


ringo writes:

I was taught that data was a collection of observations and information is data that has been analyzed, interpreted, etc. so that it "means" something.
The raw data is a perception of reality and the information is an interpretation of the perception. All in the mind.

Again, here is the dictionary definition.

quote:
information, especially facts or numbers, collected to be examined and considered and used to help decision-making, or information in an electronic form that can be stored and used by a computer:

The first word they go to is "information" to define data.

Would you agree that data exists without it being perceived?

Edited by GDR, : No reason given.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by ringo, posted 05-22-2020 3:23 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by ringo, posted 05-23-2020 12:46 PM GDR has responded

  
WookieeB
Member
Posts: 112
Joined: 01-18-2019


Message 207 of 240 (876576)
05-23-2020 4:18 AM
Reply to: Message 190 by WookieeB
05-21-2020 7:11 PM


ringo writes:

It would exist only IN the mind of whatever was thinking it. Information is a product of mind. The same reality becomes very different information in the mind of a human and the mind of an ant.

The bolded part is basically what I am saying. Information exists. Maybe you should define what you think information is. I agree, information is a product of mind. But whether that mind is in an ant, dolphin or human, it is still information. And whether or not it is different for an ant vs a human is not relevant. Probably, information as it is imprinted on a human mind is different from human to human. Much like a fingerprint on any finger is unique from person to person, yet it is still a fingerprint.

Consciousness, mathematics, science, etc. are STATES of the matter within the mind.

Merely an assertion you make with no evidence. It is an a priori philosophy. Nonetheless, it is an irrational position. Those things are abstract concepts that are not defined by the matter they may reside on.

Like water has a purpose to run downhill? That's a function, a behaviour. What you imagine as a "purpose" is just the result it happens to have.

No. Water runs downhill because it is following the physical laws of matter and gravity. The information in DNA is not there due to any physical laws of the matter of DNA. There is nothing about the makeup of nucleotides and laws of matter that dictate what information is in the DNA. A function and purpose relate to teleology, but they are not the same thing as behavior.

But how? What is the medium? What is the message made of?

I already gave an example of how with the Macbeth scenario. A medium is the carrier, but the medium is not the message, because you can have a different medium to represent the same message. So the message itself is not made of anything, it is abstract.

To put it in other words, the message is a particular arrangement of matter (or energy), but that arrangement of matter is not dependent on any law relative to that matter. The arrangement of the matter, how the matter got to be in whatever position it is, is not determined by any law of matter.

How would you distinguish matter that carries a message from matter that does not?
The information is dependent on the matter in the medium in which it is stored, minds, paper and ink, etc. Erase every copy from the matter and the information is gone with no way to get it back.

If you are alluding to a mind being required to be able to distinguish what a message is, I agree. But I would only agree with the second statement if you replaced the word "mind" with "brain". A brain is the matter, but I don't think that a mind is the same thing as a brain (and that probably is the crux of our disagreement). For the sake of discussion, in our natural world a mind is dependent on matter (the brain), but a mind is not the brain. And a message is not dependent on the matter it is written on. So yes, if you got rid of all the matter the message was riding on (including the brains), then the information goes away to.

ringo writes:

WookieeB writes:

And yet, there still is a message!

You remind me of my brother when he was young. You could show him six ways from Sunday that something wasn't true and his response would be, "But I think it is."

Cute story, but I'm not your brother, and apparently you are not aware of your own writing.

You said: "I use the word "mystical" very deliberately because there is no real message other than the arrangement of the atoms."

Now let's focus.
".....there is no real message other than the arrangement of the atoms."
"no...message" . "other" . "than" . ?????????
*whispers* "the arrangement of atoms" < - which is a message.

And yet, as you said, there still is a message!

Edited by WookieeB, : punctuation and sentence structure cleanup


This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by WookieeB, posted 05-21-2020 7:11 PM WookieeB has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by AZPaul3, posted 05-23-2020 8:00 AM WookieeB has not yet responded
 Message 210 by ringo, posted 05-23-2020 1:13 PM WookieeB has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 4977
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 208 of 240 (876577)
05-23-2020 8:00 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by WookieeB
05-23-2020 4:18 AM


The information in DNA is not there due to any physical laws of the matter of DNA. There is nothing about the makeup of nucleotides and laws of matter that dictate what information is in the DNA.

There is no information in DNA. DNA is a series of molecules that cause a specific chemical cascade. Those molecules, in accord with the laws of physics, have no option but to react as required. The information is in the mind observing the regularity, the repeatability, of that cascade.

So the message itself is not made of anything, it is abstract.

The message is symbolized in the media, be that characters in clay or electrical impulses in crystals. That symbology only has meaning as agreed by those using the symbology and that meaning, abstract as it may seem, is embodied in the physical media of the mind.

the message is a particular arrangement of matter (or energy), but that arrangement of matter is not dependent on any law relative to that matter. The arrangement of the matter, how the matter got to be in whatever position it is, is not determined by any law of matter.

I don't think you meant that.

Of course the arrangement of matter/energy must and can only be as allowed and constrained by physics. There is no other known power in the universe that can order/form/constrain particles and forces other than the laws of physics.

Again, the message is not in the matter but is in the interpretation of the symbology embodied in the matter.

Loose, inaccurate human syntax allows for saying the media contains a message, contains some information, when, in fact, the media contains only the symbols representing that information that can only be comprehended in a mind that agrees to the meaning of the symbols.


Factio Republicana delenda est.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by WookieeB, posted 05-23-2020 4:18 AM WookieeB has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18096
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 209 of 240 (876588)
05-23-2020 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 206 by GDR
05-22-2020 4:40 PM


GDR writes:

Again, here is the dictionary definition.


Dictionary definitions are often not adequate in scientific discussions.

GDR writes:

Would you agree that data exists without it being perceived?


No.

Reality exists. Observations of reality (data) require on observer (perceiver).


"I'm Fallen and I can't get up!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 206 by GDR, posted 05-22-2020 4:40 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by GDR, posted 05-23-2020 2:06 PM ringo has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18096
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 210 of 240 (876592)
05-23-2020 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 207 by WookieeB
05-23-2020 4:18 AM


Wookie B writes:

Probably, information as it is imprinted on a human mind is different from human to human.


Exactly. Because it is CREATED within the individual mind based on the unique set of inputs received by that mind.

Wookie B writes:

ringo writes:

But how? What is the medium? What is the message made of?


I already gave an example of how with the Macbeth scenario.

Your example doesn't answer the question. If every copy of Macbeth was erased from every mind and every medium, how would it be rebuilt? You claim that the information in Macbeth is floating around out there somewhere in the cosmos. So if Shakespeare managed to figure it out once, somebody else should be able to figure it out again. How? Be specific.

Wookie B writes:

For the sake of discussion, in our natural world a mind is dependent on matter (the brain), but a mind is not the brain.


No, I'm using thw word "mind" pretty much interchangeably with "brain". If you think the mind is more than just a brain function, you're going to have to supply a whole lot of evidence.

"I'm Fallen and I can't get up!"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by WookieeB, posted 05-23-2020 4:18 AM WookieeB has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020