Replies

I can understand your example, but it is strained if meant to show that self-organization can account for all of the intelligent design so evident in the universe.

That example is from economics, which relies heavily upon complex, self-organizing systems. Classic economics from Smith through Ricardo through Hayek to Friedman clearly concludes that a designed system (e.g. socialism) can never compete with a self-organized system (which in practice always means a free market). This is not meant to apply to the entire universe, but it does show that evolutionary concepts are influential and valid beyond biology. (I would like to presume that you are a believer in the self-organizing system of the free market instead of designed, command-and-control economic systems, yes?)

I would not ascribe consciousness to genetic material, but all the evidence points to processes, information, and communication that cannot take place without both intelligence and design.

You may believe that if you wish. But all you're really saying is "I don't see how these processes, information, and communication could take place without intelligence and design". Just because you can't see how it's possible doesn't mean it isn't possible.

If you really study the field of self-organizing systems, you will be astonished how complex systems can evolve from unconscious and dumb parts. For example, the engineers have created systems of small, dumb robots with very simple rules for behavior, and the ability to sense their immediate surroundings, and then turned them loose. The resulting complex behavior of the group was never designed. It's what's called an "emergent property".

Now, you're going to say, "But, but, the robots were designed", and thereby miss the point. The group behavior (i.e. the characteristics of the overall system) were never designed. They just popped up. And that shows the power of self-organizing systems, which is only a small part of the engine of evolution.

Now, you're going to say, "But, but, the robots were designed", and thereby miss the point. The group behavior (i.e. the characteristics of the overall system) were never designed. They just popped up. And that shows the power of self-organizing systems, which is only a small part of the engine of evolution.

This statement is a philosophical statement rather than a scientific one. Self-organizing systems are limited by the physics of the system and the boundary conditions. You are not going to see these systems writing out dictionaries! They are limited by the thermodynamic mechanism which constructs the "self-organizing" paterns.

I can heartily concur with what you have described as self-organization when it comes to economics. But I would hesitate to believe such organization developed apart from information, communication, and intelligence.

Take your example of the NYC food supply. Even though the individual components may be unaware of each other, the end result is still due to intelligence and design. It is sloppy, to be sure. Anyone's analysis of NYC food supply will be a self-imposed construct, fitting the current system into a pre-conceived image of "organization."

In short, I don't think this example can serve as one to show that all matter has the capacity not only to remain consistent but also to be observable, apart from any kind of intelligence or design.

We have to be careful what we mean when we say "self-organization." As far as I have been able to observe there has not been any kind of organization completely apart from intelligence and/or design. Your experience and understanding is probably different.

Thanks.

"If you really study the field of self-organizing systems, you will be astonished how complex systems can evolve from unconscious and dumb parts."

Here's where the argument gets interesting. What if "self organizing systems", which promote global entropy and therefore conform to the 2nd law, ARE the image of God, and the universe itself is a self organizing system which is sentient (having a memory of past events - seen by Hubble).

That means the concept of evolution would be intrinsic to a being some call God and others call the Universe. A sentient evolving Universe/God.

In this case, Satan would equate to the second law processes of devolution. Because we know of vitual particles and black holes (and possible wormholes to other universes), we also suspect instantaneous creation can occurr. But evolution would be possible as well.

In such a theory, atheism would be a worship of physical processes, which would be the image of a God/Universe, so atheism would in fact be a theism. Traditional religions would also be manifestations of the self organizing Universe and therefore valid in their sphere as well.

There ya go, that's what I believe.