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.
Posted Saturday, March 30, 2019
One might say LIFE is such an example. The problem is, we do not have the necessary data to prove this. If we believe that life occurred without intelligent design, we can rely only on assumptions because we cannot observe its creation in the absence of pre-existing life.
How about some other counter-example, some natural phenomenon where functional information is present, and we can prove that there is no intelligent design behind the functionality. If such is possible, we should expect to see more than one example in nature (the one example being life).
Mere survival and successful reproduction do not explain all of the functionality expressed in DNA. Every organism possesses these qualities. Survival alone does not require multi-cellular organisms, the ability to fly, walk, think, see, or mate. Indeed, survival is not needed by nature at all! Dead planets have no need for life or survival of any kind. I would argue that the very goal of survival is an abstract functional objective, evidence of intelligent design.