THINK ABOUT THIS: If Information Is The Prerequisite For Creation, Then …
There is one sine qua non characteristic shared by every living thing that exists now, ever has existed or ever will exist — information that produces or enables a defining structure and purpose. That is a statement all reasonable advocates of evolutionary materialism and Intelligent Design ought to be able to confirm.
Can information be random or is that an oxymoron? (Photo by ThisisEngineering RAEng on Unsplash)
So consider this: Without the information provided by its DNA, not even the most basic cell can produce the internal components and process sequences required to carry out its purpose, nor could it generate the protective membrane that encloses and protects it.
That being the case, then the fundamental issue in the origin of life debate is not “how it got here,” but rather what is the originating source of the creative information without which nothing can be in a material universe?
But information is not random. Randomness is in fact the opposite of information because the former by definition happens by chance, while the latter by definition has order.
And order requires choice, which requires will. There cannot be will, however, without consciousness, and the essential prerequisite for consciousness is life (note, not mere existence, as rocks have no will but they exist).
Thus, there is for we humans an inescapable circularity in the logic through which we seek the answer to the question of origins – because we lack complete information, we must make an assumption about the life that is foundational to consciousness, will, choice, order and information.
Now, which assumption is the most reasonable, given what we do know? Evolutionary materialism requires either eternal matter, which is impossible to verify, or matter was ordered … randomly. But is not ordered randomness an oxymoron?
Is it not more reasonable to assume the life source of will, choice, order and thus information must exist outside of the universe of space, time and matter? Theologians and more than a few contemporary philosophers call that God.
I invite anybody, regardless of your position in this discussion, to critique the above. Tell me where you think I am wrong, or why you think I am right. Or just how to improve the logic train. All I require is you do so with civility.
Thanks in advance.
” There cannot be will, however, without consciousness, and the essential prerequisite for consciousness is life ”
In my opinion the prerequisite for life is consciousness… consciousness just IS. Consciousness is eternal – life as we know it is created and finite.
In order for creation as we know it to exist, Evolutionary Materialists give random chance the same kind of “will” or personal agency that God has. Except random chance eliminates the moral authority over creation that God has. Which is the whole point, one would think.
Morality is a subset of information, so any kind of morality that arises from random chance is necessarily random.
Said it better than I could, Nick, thanks!
RE “But information is not random. Randomness is in fact the opposite of information because the former by definition happens by chance, while the latter by definition has order. And order requires choice, which requires will.” this is garbage.
Molecules may form at one level, a crystalline structure which is highly ordered, but is the natural result of existing structure. Although it appears “Ordered” it has nothing to do with choice or will. Countless other examples show how in nature “order” does not imply or require “choice or will.”
But if your argument was accepted as plausible of “randomness/information/order/will”, then various phenomena those of faith would like to ascribe to God could as well be ascribed to super-intelligent aliens. There is no need to invoke God to explain the phenomena described.
Mike, why is it “garbage,” as you assert in your first graph? Please be specific. Regarding the structure of crystals, crystals are not living cells. Perhaps I should have been clearer that my primary focus in this analysis is on living cells. Finally, that’s quite a leap of faith – or should I say “unverified assumption?” – you make there that things people of faith ascribe to God could just as well be ascribed to super-intelligent aliens.
No need to invoke a God, garbage-thinkers, just invoke godlike aliens!
Leaving, of course, the question of just HOW those “aliens” originated. An exercise in pushing the problem one step away.
There is only two possibilities: Either matter gave rise to mind, or mind gave rise to matter. There is no middle ground. We know that all of the physical laws do not produce information – they simple describe the universe we live in, but are mathematical constructions of the mind. A simple “John loves Mary” in the sand only comes from a mind, not wind, tide, and gravity. There is chemical coding in our DNA / RNA systems in all living organisms. It takes a triplet of DNA bases to determine the next proper amino acid for a protein, and there is a known stop/”end of file” code in the DNA – again, coding. Plain and simple. Coding requires a mind. I also encourage you to look at the physicist period table. There is a very simple and elegant 3D arrangement of all the elements will fit into; see https://www.meta-synthesis.com/webbook/35_pt/pt_database.php?PT_id=38 There is incredible order from the big bang embedded into the elements of this universe. Order does not come from an almost infinity release of energy unless there is a mind behind the release. Enjoy.
If you want more challenges to the mind/matter issue, I highly recommend Frank Turek’s Cross Examined ministry. He does a great job of presenting the information. https://crossexamined.org/
I would suggest you read Eric Metaxas’s book “Is Atheism Dead? You will discover scientific proof that life and our planet is by Intelligent Design! The astronomical odds that it is NOT Intelligent design is laid out by the scientific community. The more science advances the more Intelligent Design has been proven. I have always been critical of God or the existence of a superior being, although these scientific findings prove it without out a doubt. It has changed my view and my life.
Your argument suffers from the p<.05 problem.
"Luck is inherent in random trials. In a medical study, some patients may be healthier. In an agricultural study, some soil may be more fertile. In an educational study, some students may be more motivated. Researchers consequently calculate the probability (the p-value) that the outcomes might happen by chance. A low p-value indicates that the results cannot easily be attributed to the luck of the draw.
How low? In the 1920s, the great British statistician Ronald Fisher said that he considered p-values below 5% to be persuasive and, so, 5% became the hurdle for the “statistically significant” certification needed for publication, funding and fame.
It is not a difficult hurdle. Suppose that a hapless researcher calculates the correlations among hundreds of variables, blissfully unawarethat the data are all, in fact, random numbers. On average, one out of 20 correlations will be statistically significant, even though every correlation is nothing more than coincidence.
Real researchers don’t correlate random numbers but, all too often, they correlate what are essentially randomly chosen variables. This haphazard search for statistical significance even has a name: data mining. As with random numbers, the correlation between randomly chosen, unrelated variables has a 5% chance of being fortuitously statistically significant. Data mining can be augmented by manipulating, pruning and otherwise torturing the data to get low p-values."
TLDR; an observer within the universe has no way of knowing if he is observing random chance or intelligent design. Given enough variables, enough time and enough universes, it is absolutely possible to live in a universe that is random but appears designed. And since "time" is itself one of the variables that can mutate, there's no way of knowing what the probabilities are from inside the system.
Now, Godel demonstrated that Anselm's proof for the existence of God was VALID according to the laws of modal logic, but Godel did NOT prove that Anselm's argument was TRUE. He can't. Proving something true is outside the bounds of logical proof, logic can only show validity.
So, your argument fails. In fact, it MUST fail according to the tenets of Christianity. Persons are not known by proof, they are known by self-revelation. The persons of the Trinity are self-revealed (which is why the OT didn't know there was a Trinity – the Trinitarian Persons had not yet revealed the inner workings of the Godhead). God is certainly pure Logic, but He is, more importantly, Three Persons.
Thomas was chastised not because he sought physical proof, but because he failed to believe his friends, the other ten surviving apostles. Thomas was in the same boat the rest of us have been in for 2000 years – we have no physical evidence, all we have is trust in eyewitness testimony and self-revelation. Faith is the evidence of things not seen, but what is the evidence that warrants faith? According to St. Paul, it is the Resurrection. If Christ is not risen from the dead (a physical event we know about through eyewitness testimony of the empty tomb, but – interestingly – not through eyewitness testimony of the actual Resurrection itself), then we are all dead in our sins.
Because God is pure logic, we must use logic in our search for God. Our search through the physical universe allows us to observe the witness the universe makes to God's existence, but that, by itself can never be sufficient. For the best proof, we must rely on the testimony of those who claim to have seen with their eyes and touched with their hands. God is pure logic, God is Love. Ultimately, we find God not through analytics, nor through emotional experience, but through the choice to serve persons, that is, through the choice to Love. The only logical choice is love. If you want evidence of God's existence, start there.
For US humans, not WE humans. For is a preposition so the objective case follows. Interesting idea that intelligent design applies only to the VERY BEGINNING of Life and that the rest is Evolution. The early Church Fathers regarded Genesis as an allegory rather than as historical fact like the reign of the Emperor Augustus. Interrestingly Genesis has the birds created first THEN the “animals” meaning mammals mostly. This is the same order that Evolution now has things in. As for giraffes, giraffes with smaller hearts wouldn’t last so that could be at work. The breeding of horses has created animals with a strong liability to fatal bone breaks; similarly dog breeding has led to German Shepherds prone to become so lame by age 7 (yong for dogs) that they have to be put down. Of course, this all could also be to The Creation’s having been a Six-Day Rush Job!
Nate, I always appreciate having the proper grammar pointed out to me. Thanks very much. Your point about Geerman Shepherds is well-taken. We have Labrador Retrievers and they are prone to hip displacia at around 9-10 years. So sad when one has to be put down.
Let’s face it, the materialists have a lot going for them. If one asks “how does a bumblebee fly?”, the answer “because God made it that way” is not very interesting; nor does it yield much new knowledge. The materialists defer the question of God, and study the bee’s physical structure, how fast the wings beat, and so forth. This yields a wealth of knowledge and opens doors to more. (How does a dragonfly fly?)
Indeed, this approach has been so productive that the question of God is no longer deferred: it is dismissed a priori. And why not? It’s not as if we’re going to run out of things to learn. Locusts and gnats and moths and mosquitoes all fly, and we haven’t yet left the realm of insects. How does one not get lost in the wonder?
Materialists are amazed at the results of time and chance. Believers are amazed at the boundless ingenuity of the Creator. It is in that sense of amazement that we all find ourselves “not far from the Kingdom of God”.
The question of God can be deferred, but ultimately not dismissed. When we are not far from the Kingdom it is our answer to that question which determines in which direction we then move.
Well said, Chuck, well said, hope you are well.
Umm. What’s harder to believe, that all of existence came into being from the Big Bang 14 billion years ago for no reason what so ever from the nothing that existed prior into what we see today, or was all of this Created by a Supremely Intelligent Being who is completely Transcendental to the point where one must question individuality itself to Realize such a One as the very Basis of Existence?
[…] in this space, I presented a proposition that information, the prerequisite of all life, must be the result of conscious choice and will, […]