Entropy, life and teleology

  • Thread starter Thread starter Neithan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Neithan said:
40.png
lelinator:
reality simply exists because the existence of nothing is impossible, and what we perceive as order is simply the inevitable outcome of order arising out of disorder.
Click to expand...
Order is not inevitable from disorder.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry, but I haven’t had an opportunity to respond until now.

That being said, there’s something that I need to clarify about your response.

By “Order is not inevitable from disorder.” are you saying that order can indeed arise from disorder, but that such a process simply isn’t inevitable?

Or are saying that it’s actually impossible for order to spontaneously arise from disorder?

If it’s the latter, then what leads you to believe that it’s impossible for order to spontaneously arise from disorder?
 
Freddy said:
I disagree. And I’ll use something you said to show you why: “It cannot have any potentially real parts, states, or properties, since everything that it is is necessarily real and not potentially real”.
Click to expand...
The CCC is changing and therefore has actualised potential in it’s nature. If the CCC had the fullness of it’s reality it wouldn’t have any potential states. All it’s states, everything that it is or could be would always and all at the same time be eternally actual without change. It wouldn’t fluctuate. It wouldn’t have any emergent properties or new natures or any new realisations in it’s nature because it would already be all that it is.

The CCC is fluctuating. It is not the ultimate reality, even if you don’t agree that God is.
 
Last edited:
IWantGod said:
40.png
Freddy:
I disagree. And I’ll use something you said to show you why: “It cannot have any potentially real parts, states, or properties, since everything that it is is necessarily real and not potentially real”.
Click to expand...
The CCC is changing and therefore has actualised potential in it’s nature. If the CCC had the fullness of it’s reality it wouldn’t have any potential states. All it’s states, everything that it is or could be would always and all at the same time be eternally actual without change. It wouldn’t fluctuate. It wouldn’t have any emergent properties or new natures or any new realisations in it’s nature because it would already be all that it is.

The CCC is fluctuating. It is not the ultimate reality, even if you don’t agree that God is.
Click to expand...
Your quote again:

“It (existence) cannot have any potentially real parts, states, or properties, since everything that it is is necessarily real and not potentially real. In other-words this ultimate reality has the fullness of it’s reality and is not in anyway limited in the expression of it’s existence since it is existence itself.”

That’s this reality. Do you grant that there was a big bang and that this existence fulfills the requirements as you listed above? Obviously. And that’s that’s the existence that the ccc premise allows for. A new beginning.
 
Last edited:
IWantGod said:
40.png
Freddy:
Then you deny your own definition.
Click to expand...
This reality is changing. It has actualised potential in it’s nature. It is not a necessary act of reality.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure you’re following. I will agree with everything you say regarding this existence because it’s the same existence we are talking about.
 
Freddy said:
Mutation is random. And evolution is indeed mindless, without design or purpose. But natural selection isn’t random, so the whole process itself becomes non random.
Click to expand...
The whole process is the enigma, given entropy. There is an identifiable process that is distinguishable from any possible event, so relative, not absolute, randomness. Analogously, information algorithms can generate randomness, or appear to, but it’s still part of the algorithm.
 
I’m saying that order is not inevitable from disorder, but the converse is true based on observable facts about physical laws: disorder is inevitable from order. It is incredible to say, “what we perceive as order is simply the inevitable outcome of order arising out of disorder.” That does not follow. It is not inevitable. So there is some explanation lacking.
 
How about one of those “problems” then? Or is it a situation where the sum is greater than the parts?
 
Neithan said:
40.png
Freddy:
Mutation is random. And evolution is indeed mindless, without design or purpose. But natural selection isn’t random, so the whole process itself becomes non random.
Click to expand...
The whole process is the enigma, given entropy. There is an identifiable process that is distinguishable from any possible event, so relative, not absolute, randomness.
Click to expand...
I don’t think we need get into a philosophical discussion of the exact meaning of random. In the context of evolution, natural selection is obviously non random. That is, a choice is being made. A selection from multiple options takes places. Mutation is an event where no choices are made and no selection from multiple options takes place.

In that sense it is ‘random’.
 
Last edited:
Neithan said:
How about one of those “problems” then? Or is it a situation where the sum is greater than the parts?
Click to expand...
I think we can sum it up as a lack of evidence. But I’d need to know what you think is evidence first. Some may say it’s personal revelation. Some might say it’s philosophical arguments. Some might say it’s evidence of design. Some may say the bible itself is evidence. Some might say…well, it goes on.
 
There is something rather than nothing, so entropy is not absolute, therefore life? That doesn’t engage or I’m missing your point. Energy exists, and the four fundamental forces describe how in basic ways; if there was no energy there would be no entropy. There would be nothing physical. We’re looking at this interaction of physical laws and asking how something like life, which is not a fundamental force, but something actually proceeding on free energy that increases in complexity over time.
 
Freddy said:
Well…maybe in another universe. But it was obviously inevitable in this one otherwise you wouldn’t be reading this.
Click to expand...
It happened. It’s an enormous assumption to say that it was inevitable as a necessary consequence of the state of the universe at any point in time prior to abiogenesis. And if that’s true, then it was not random.
 
Neithan said:
There is something rather than nothing, so entropy is not absolute, therefore life? That doesn’t engage or I’m missing your point. Energy exists, and the four fundamental forces describe how in basic ways; if there was no energy there would be no entropy. There would be nothing physical. We’re looking at this interaction of physical laws and asking how something like life, which is not a fundamental force, but something actually proceeding on free energy that increases in complexity over time.
Click to expand...
Am I missing something here? Increasing complexity is that which produced the universe as we see it now.

"…we know our Universe started out very simple…In stark contrast, the Universe today is highly structured on a vast range of length and mass scales. In the evolution towards increasing complexity, the formation of the first stars marks a primary transition event. "

So the very fact that there is a general (but not overall) increase in complexity throughout the universe seems to me to be an undeniable fact. As I said, you actually sitting there reading this is proof of that fact.
 
Semantics; disorder and expansion is also increasing complexity. Life is an increase in order proceeding on free energy. I’m not sure if you’re arguing that life is not distinct from non-life, though. If you are, that’s one way to avoid the explanatory gap.
 
Neithan said:
Semantics; disorder and expansion is also increasing complexity. Life is an increase in order proceeding on free energy. I’m not sure if you’re arguing that life is not distinct from non-life, though. If you are, that’s one way to avoid the explanatory gap.
Click to expand...
I’m not arguing. I’m pointing out that increased complexity is a feature of the universe. And life is part of that process.

If we were somehow viewing another universe and we could see localised increases in complexity and I said: ‘Y’know, I’ll bet this will lead to life, which after all is perhaps the ultimate expression of complexity’ and you disagreed then we might have an interesting conversation as to the possibilities.

But we’re having this conversation here and now where we can see localised increases in complexity and where life obviously exists.

If we went back to the other universe at some point in the future and life had arisen then I’d suggest to you that I’d been proved right. But we don’t need to go anywhere to have that proven. It’s happened here.

I’m bemused as to how anyone can argue against it…
 
Freddy said:
I’m bemused as to how anyone can argue against it…
Click to expand...
Aside from equivocating the complexity of star formation with life (the gap in explanation to account for the appearance of biological processes from physical ones), you seem to be advancing opposing concepts: it was random, but inevitable. There is no teleology, but everything must have happened the way it has happened.
 
Last edited:
Neithan said:
40.png
Freddy:
I’m bemused as to how anyone can argue against it…
Click to expand...
Aside from equivocating the complexity of star formation with life (the gap in explanation to account for the appearance of biological processes from physical ones), you seem to be advancing opposing concepts: it was random, but inevitable. There is no teleology, but everything must have happened the way it has happened.
Click to expand...
If someone wins the lottery it was a random draw that made her day. AND it was inevitable that someone would win it.

Life is inevitable in my opinion. That it happened to be this life was entirely random.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top