On January 1, 2019, Stephen Meyer published a post called “Intelligent Design Is Detectable by Science” on the EvolutionNews.org blog. His main point can be summarized in this way. Functional (aka complex specified) information is necessarily and universally linked to intelligence so that when we observe functional information in DNA we can reliably infer that there must have been an intelligent agent. Since scientific methods can detect functional information in DNA, then an intelligent agent is detectable by science.
Meyer justifies the linkage between functional information and intelligence by citing a wealth of examples where we know such information requires an intelligent agent. His inductive argument relies solely on examples of human-designed systems such as language and computer programs. He then assumes without justification that this necessary linkage between information and intelligence can be extended from the human design realm to the biological realm. Yet he offers no indication of how and why functional information is connected to intelligence and no rationale for the universality of such linkage. This is a critical missing step in Meyer’s logic that needs to be supplied before his conclusion can be credibly considered.
I would suggest that one possible linkage between functional information and intelligence is abstract reasoning. Whenever functionality of information is determined by abstract relationships, then intelligence is indeed necessarily involved. However, when functionality is determined by physical relationships instead of abstract relationships, then no conclusion can be made about intelligence. In the case of biological systems, functional information of DNA is determined by the survival and ability to reproduce of the organism. This is a physical and not an abstract relationship. Thus it would seem that the connection between functional information and intelligence cannot be extended to the biological realm.
Blog Home
All Blogs
RSS
Posted Sunday, March 22, 2020
The argument here seems to be a distinction between "functional" information and "abstract" information. Functional information might not require a creator, while abstract information certainly does.
What is abstraction? In its simplest form, it is meaning that is arbitrarily assigned by an intelligent being, to otherwise meaningless things. The shapes used to construct letters and words have no meaning in themselves, but because meaning was assigned by humans, they can convey information. This is clearly abstract.
Another form of abstraction has to do with layers of meaning. A radio, for example, is functional. We know that there are naturally occurring crystals that can receive radio waves and turn them into electrical impulses. Though unlikely, one might imagine natural "components" falling together to turn radio waves into electrical impulses and then into sounds. A machine that makes radios, however, adds a layer of abstraction. A machine that makes machines that make radios is so far abstracted from radio wave reception and sound production that such a machine could not be constructed without an intelligent creator.
This is how the building blocks of life function. A cell performs certain useful tasks, such as ingesting nutrients and excreting waste products. Reproduction, the foundation of life, is not simply a third task that cells perform. Reproduction fundamentally changes how cells perform these tasks. The machinery of reproduction does not directly ingest nutrients. It does not even directly build the machinery necessary to ingest nutrients. It builds the machinery that builds machinery to ingest nutrients, and to make copies of itself.