Scientific Intelligence (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Science & Origins



Message

essentialsaltes -> Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 12:03:59 PM)

In order to save our hardworking moderator some time, I wanted to make a new thread on the topic of intelligence. This evolved from the Evolved? thread.

ID posits that there were one or more 'intelligences' before the existence of life on earth. And that these intelligences were responsible for the origin of life (and possibly/probably they were/are also responsible for at least part of the further change-over-time that life has gone through since that time).

What is the scientific evidence for the existence of these intelligences?

Since ID is attempting to demonstrate that life comes from intelligence, we cannot use the existence of life as evidence for intelligence.
For that would be to assume the thing one is trying to prove.

So what other scientific evidence points to intelligences that existed before life on earth?

In addition to addressing that particular question, this thread could also explore the definition of intelligence (we have to know what it is, before we can look for evidence of it) and potential methods for measuring or detecting this intelligence scientifically. For reference, Wikipedia begins its long and interesting page on Intelligence with this definition:

quote:

Intelligence (also called intellect) is an umbrella term used to describe a property of the mind that encompasses many related abilities, such as the capacities to reason, to plan, to solve problems, to think abstractly, to comprehend ideas, to use language, and to learn. There are several ways to define intelligence. In some cases, intelligence may include traits such as creativity, personality, character, knowledge, or wisdom. However, most psychologists prefer not to include these traits in the definition of intelligence.

I realize that on this forum, the existence of the Christian God is generally admitted. This, I believe, is as a result of faith rather than scientific evidence. This thread is about scientific evidence and scientific methods, not faith.



KaseyTom -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 12:24:20 PM)

quote:

Intelligence (also called intellect) is an umbrella term used to describe a property of the mind that encompasses many related abilities, such as the capacities to reason, to plan, to solve problems, to think abstractly, to comprehend ideas, to use language, and to learn. There are several ways to define intelligence. In some cases, intelligence may include traits such as creativity, personality, character, knowledge, or wisdom. However, most psychologists prefer not to include these traits in the definition of intelligence.


This definition of intelligence (like all definitions of intelligence) implies it is a serial process. Serial processes imply the existence of time.

ID proponents claim that the universe, and hence time, were created by an intelligence which by definition cannot exist outside of the universe.



essentialsaltes -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 12:28:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KaseyTom

quote:

Intelligence (also called intellect) is an umbrella term used to describe a property of the mind that encompasses many related abilities, such as the capacities to reason, to plan, to solve problems, to think abstractly, to comprehend ideas, to use language, and to learn. There are several ways to define intelligence. In some cases, intelligence may include traits such as creativity, personality, character, knowledge, or wisdom. However, most psychologists prefer not to include these traits in the definition of intelligence.


This definition of intelligence (like all definitions of intelligence) implies it is a serial process. Serial processes imply the existence of time.

ID proponents claim that the universe, and hence time, were created by an intelligence which by definition cannot exist outside of the universe.


Take it easy now. IDists only claim that life on earth came from intelligence. There was plenty of time around before life on earth.



Jhud -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 12:58:23 PM)

Intelligence from an ID perspective would simply be an entity with the will and intention to produce something new from previously existing elements. Objects which definitively indicate the the neccesity of an intelligent entity include information systyems and machines. We know that an intelligent entity existed previously to the existence of humans because information systems and machines came into existence before the existence of humans; in fact, biologically, humans are the product of such information systems and machines.



KaseyTom -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 1:00:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes

quote:

ORIGINAL: KaseyTom

quote:

Intelligence (also called intellect) is an umbrella term used to describe a property of the mind that encompasses many related abilities, such as the capacities to reason, to plan, to solve problems, to think abstractly, to comprehend ideas, to use language, and to learn. There are several ways to define intelligence. In some cases, intelligence may include traits such as creativity, personality, character, knowledge, or wisdom. However, most psychologists prefer not to include these traits in the definition of intelligence.


This definition of intelligence (like all definitions of intelligence) implies it is a serial process. Serial processes imply the existence of time.

ID proponents claim that the universe, and hence time, were created by an intelligence which by definition cannot exist outside of the universe.


Take it easy now. IDists only claim that life on earth came from intelligence. There was plenty of time around before life on earth.


OK fine.
Do ID proponents claim an intelligent designer created a 4.5 billion year old earth and a history of life that through intelligent intervention developed over a 3 billion year period in a way that appears to be evolution?
Or are we talking about an intelligent designer creating talking snakes and the like?



essentialsaltes -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 1:24:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

We know that an intelligent entity existed previously to the existence of humans because information systems and machines came into existence before the existence of humans


I'm sorry; that is not relevant to this thread. I clearly stated: "Since ID is attempting to demonstrate that life comes from intelligence, we cannot use the existence of life as evidence for intelligence."



essentialsaltes -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 1:31:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KaseyTom

quote:

ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes
Take it easy now. IDists only claim that life on earth came from intelligence. There was plenty of time around before life on earth.


OK fine.
Do ID proponents claim an intelligent designer created a 4.5 billion year old earth and a history of life that through intelligent intervention developed over a 3 billion year period in a way that appears to be evolution?


I believe they do accept an 'old' earth, but they would probably take exception to the idea that the intelligence acted "in a way that appears to be evolution." They claim that there have been certain changes-over-time that could not be produced by evolution.

quote:

Or are we talking about an intelligent designer creating talking snakes and the like?


Good heavens! Talking snakes? ID supporters assure us over and over again that they are doing science, not mythology.



Jhud -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 1:31:48 PM)

quote:

I'm sorry; that is not relevant to this thread. I clearly stated: "Since ID is attempting to demonstrate that life comes from intelligence, we cannot use the existence of life as evidence for intelligence."


Well that is not what ID claims; ID claimns that certain structures and systems are clear indicators of the activity of intelligence, and that such are found in living organisms; you can't base an OP on a straw man and not expect to be challenged on it.



essentialsaltes -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 2:14:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

I'm sorry; that is not relevant to this thread. I clearly stated: "Since ID is attempting to demonstrate that life comes from intelligence, we cannot use the existence of life as evidence for intelligence."


Well that is not what ID claims; ID claimns that certain structures and systems are clear indicators of the activity of intelligence, and that such are found in living organisms; you can't base an OP on a straw man and not expect to be challenged on it.


Very well. Since ID is attempting to demonstrate (and it hasn't yet) that certain structures and systems are clear indicators of the activity of intelligence, IDists cannot use the existence of certain structures and systems to demonstrate the existence of a pre-existing intelligence.

You have to demonstrate your claim, before you can start making deductions from it.

However, this thread is not really about this ID claim. The topic is: What is the scientific evidence for the existence of intelligences before the existence of life on earth?

If that is not something ID theorists are interested in, then I apologize. The question is a more general one - everyone is invited to answer.



KaseyTom -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 2:20:20 PM)

Why is it the overwhelming majority of life forms that have existed are extinct? Are they the designers failed attempts?



Jhud -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 3:19:35 PM)

quote:

Very well. Since ID is attempting to demonstrate (and it hasn't yet) that certain structures and systems are clear indicators of the activity of intelligence, IDists cannot use the existence of certain structures and systems to demonstrate the existence of a pre-existing intelligence.

You have to demonstrate your claim, before you can start making deductions from it.

However, this thread is not really about this ID claim. The topic is: What is the scientific evidence for the existence of intelligences before the existence of life on earth?

If that is not something ID theorists are interested in, then I apologize. The question is a more general one - everyone is invited to answer.


No, I have tons of evidence that machines and information systems only arise from intelligent agency, and there is no evidence to the contrary; the ball is in your court to prove it can happen apart from intelligence.

The existence of such structures and systems is therefore itself evidence of the existence of an intelligence preceding human life.



Jhud -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 3:21:07 PM)

quote:

Why is it the overwhelming majority of life forms that have existed are extinct? Are they the designers failed attempts?


The overwhelming majority of life forms are not extinct.



KaseyTom -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 3:47:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

Why is it the overwhelming majority of life forms that have existed are extinct? Are they the designers failed attempts?


The overwhelming majority of life forms are not extinct.


Of all the species that have ever existed during in the last 3 billion years, what percentage are alive today?
How many living species are even 50 million years old?



essentialsaltes -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 4:31:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

the ball is in your court to prove it can happen apart from intelligence.


Well, it happened three billion years ago, and there weren't any intelligences around.



Jhud -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 5:34:32 PM)

quote:

Of all the species that have ever existed during in the last 3 billion years, what percentage are alive today?
How many living species are even 50 million years old?


You didn't say species.



Jhud -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 5:37:03 PM)

quote:

Well, it happened three billion years ago, and there weren't any intelligences around.


That's not what the evidence shows; to say that you would have to show information driven machinery can arise apart from intelligence.



essentialsaltes -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 6:12:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

Well, it happened three billion years ago, and there weren't any intelligences around.


That's not what the evidence shows;


Ah, then you have evidence that intelligences were around three billion years ago! That's all I'm asking for. What is this evidence?



Real_Solitude -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 6:55:28 PM)

I have a question vaguely related to all of this.

All forms of information that we know of require matter or energy to exist. Information being the purposeful, meaningful arrangement of matter or energy.

The only places that energy and matter can exist is within the space-time continuum, being that they require the laws within space-time to function.

Intelligence could be describe as the ability to store, retrieve, manipulate, and comprehend information. Interaction with matter, energy, or the fundamental forces has (in all known cases) required matter, energy, or other forces.
That is, in order to be intelligent, one must have intimate interactions with matter and energy. In order to contain, store, retrieve, or manipulate information, a being must be made of, or contain, matter and energy.

Further, the all of these actions require time in order to occur. Without time, even if information were present, nothing could happen to that information. In order for information to be manipulated, it must exist inside of time.
For instance, if a human existed outside of time, they could be said to be potentially intelligent (requiring only the addition of time in order to be able to manipulate information), but they could not be said to be actually intelligent, because they wouldn't be able to currently manipulate information.

If God is non-physical, and outside of time, how can he contain, or manipulate any information? The follow up question obviously being, "How can God be described as intelligent if he is non-physical, non-energy, and exists outside of time?"



Real_Solitude -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 7:10:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

Well, it happened three billion years ago, and there weren't any intelligences around.


That's not what the evidence shows; to say that you would have to show information driven machinery can arise apart from intelligence.


The evidence doesn't show that information systems can only arise from intelligence either.

To be strictly scientific:
A great number of information systems, including all technology of every species, has arisen due to manipulation by intelligent (to at least some degree) beings. All of these beings have been composed of cells.

However, for an even greater number of cases (all life) the cause of origin is unknown.
While scientists have tried to create cellular life from its chemical components, they have (to my knowledge) failed thus far.
Scientists have also attempted to generate life by merely placing all of the necessary components in favorable conditions, in an attempt to create simple cellular life. They have (to my knowledge) failed thus far.

From this we can make a few statements:
1. All information systems apart from cells has arisen due to cellular lifeforms. (Either directly, as in a person building a computer, or indirectly, as in a computer generating information.)

2. No known intelligence has thus far been successful in creating cellular life.

3. No known unintelligent process has thus far been successful in producing cellular life.

Conclusion-
There is no known process, whether intelligently guided or not, that has produced cellular life.

Further testing of each suggested method for producing cellular life (intelligent and non-intelligent processes) must be further researched before one may draw a definitive conclusion as to the origins of cellular life. (And thus, indirectly, to the origins of all information systems.)



Jon_St3wart -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 7:13:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
No, I have tons of evidence that machines and information systems only arise from intelligent agency, and there is no evidence to the contrary; the ball is in your court to prove it can happen apart from intelligence.


What machines and information systems are you referring to in regards to life, Jhud? Care to point out a few examples.

All intelligent beings exist materially and are a part of the system you are referring to, so the balls in your court to prove that intelligence can exist external to humans.

quote:


The existence of such structures and systems is therefore itself evidence of the existence of an intelligence preceding human life.


It's circumstancial evidence.



KaseyTom -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/8/2008 11:42:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud

quote:

Of all the species that have ever existed during in the last 3 billion years, what percentage are alive today?
How many living species are even 50 million years old?


You didn't say species.


Sorry, I'll rephrase my question.

Why is it the overwhelming majority of species that have existed are extinct? Are they the designers failed attempts?



Kath -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/9/2008 11:16:19 AM)

Dear essentialsaltes,

An email has been sent to your account. If you did not receive it please contact community@salemwebnetwork.com

Sincerely
Kath
Volunteer Assistant Administrator

Please do not reply to this message within the Community.
Please do not send me PMs regarding this message as I am unable to discuss it further.
Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns allowing time for a response during normal business hours.
Posts which ignore this warning will be removed without warning and may result in other action in accordance with the Terms of Service.
Please review our FAQ for an explanation of this policy.



DanJames -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/9/2008 2:06:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real_Solitude

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jhud
That's not what the evidence shows; to say that you would have to show information driven machinery can arise apart from intelligence.


The evidence doesn't show that information systems can only arise from intelligence either.

To be strictly scientific:
A great number of information systems, including all technology of every species, has arisen due to manipulation by intelligent (to at least some degree) beings. All of these beings have been composed of cells.

I had to read this a couple times, but it looks like what you are saying is that since humans (and other animals) are cellular, and these cellular beings created technology, therefore only cells can cause technology and information systems.
quote:


However, for an even greater number of cases (all life) the cause of origin is unknown.
While scientists have tried to create cellular life from its chemical components, they have (to my knowledge) failed thus far.

I know it may not progress the topic very far, but just for everybody's enjoyment (and at no extra charge): scientists have done everything but create a life from components. It's very costly to make DNA, heck it's costly just to make a primer. But if we had the grant to do it, for the sake of humanity we could create a bacterium from scratch. It would probably cost in the high hundreds of thousands of dollars to do, but an entire code could conceivably be created with a little bit of creativity and something very much like the technology that we have today. This life would UNDOUBTEDLY be based on already existing code, so it wouldn't be something we ourselves invented, merely something we mimicked.
quote:


Scientists have also attempted to generate life by merely placing all of the necessary components in favorable conditions, in an attempt to create simple cellular life. They have (to my knowledge) failed thus far.
miserably failed, I would say
quote:


From this we can make a few statements:
1. All information systems apart from cells has arisen due to cellular lifeforms. (Either directly, as in a person building a computer, or indirectly, as in a computer generating information.)

2. No known intelligence has thus far been successful in creating cellular life.

3. No known unintelligent process has thus far been successful in producing cellular life.

Conclusion-
There is no known process, whether intelligently guided or not, that has produced cellular life.

Further testing of each suggested method for producing cellular life (intelligent and non-intelligent processes) must be further researched before one may draw a definitive conclusion as to the origins of cellular life. (And thus, indirectly, to the origins of all information systems.)

Your comments are convincing enough for your conclusion, but your conclusion does not necessarily provide a counterpoint to the ID claim that machines and information systems show signs of necessitating intelligence and are found in living systems. The interaction of enzymes and proteins with DNA is nothing short of machinery interacting with information systems. These do not arise on their own accord, but require intelligence to produce.

You can assume a priori that there is nothing supernatural, but that does not remove the necessity of something intelligent for the creation of machines and information systems. I believe that it was Something supernatural that created life, but ID does not necessitate for the provision of the identity of the designing agent, only that one must have existed.



Real_Solitude -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/9/2008 4:19:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DanJames
The evidence doesn't show that information systems can only arise from intelligence either.

To be strictly scientific:
A great number of information systems, including all technology of every species, has arisen due to manipulation by intelligent (to at least some degree) beings. All of these beings have been composed of cells.

I had to read this a couple times, but it looks like what you are saying is that since humans (and other animals) are cellular, and these cellular beings created technology, therefore only cells can cause technology and information systems.

Not necessarily that only cells can cause technology, but merely that cells are the only things we know of that have created technology.

quote:


However, for an even greater number of cases (all life) the cause of origin is unknown.
While scientists have tried to create cellular life from its chemical components, they have (to my knowledge) failed thus far.

I know it may not progress the topic very far, but just for everybody's enjoyment (and at no extra charge): scientists have done everything but create a life from components. It's very costly to make DNA, heck it's costly just to make a primer. But if we had the grant to do it, for the sake of humanity we could create a bacterium from scratch. It would probably cost in the high hundreds of thousands of dollars to do, but an entire code could conceivably be created with a little bit of creativity and something very much like the technology that we have today. This life would UNDOUBTEDLY be based on already existing code, so it wouldn't be something we ourselves invented, merely something we mimicked.
Indeed, and this is undoubtedly the easier of the two tasks proposed. However, while it may be possible, or even probable, it has not yet happened. To say that intelligence is capable of generating something as adaptable as life without there being any demonstrable examples of this happening is fruitless.

quote:


Your comments are convincing enough for your conclusion, but your conclusion does not necessarily provide a counterpoint to the ID claim that machines and information systems show signs of necessitating intelligence and are found in living systems. The interaction of enzymes and proteins with DNA is nothing short of machinery interacting with information systems. These do not arise on their own accord, but require intelligence to produce.

You may believe that these systems show signs of necessitating intelligence. Others would say they show signs of having arisen naturally.
But to say that they do not arise of their own accord, and that they do require intelligence to produce is facetious. We do not have evidence one way or the other that life arose from intelligence, or simply from natural processes. You can believe what you want about the origin of life, but until there is enough supporting evidence to justify your claim your beliefs are just that, beliefs.

quote:

You can assume a priori that there is nothing supernatural, but that does not remove the necessity of something intelligent for the creation of machines and information systems. I believe that it was Something supernatural that created life, but ID does not necessitate for the provision of the identity of the designing agent, only that one must have existed.

I'm not assuming anything about the origins of life.
I was also not referring to life only on earth. There have been various ideas of exogenesis proposed by both sides of the debate. However, there must have been an original lifeform, no matter where it originated. This is the lifeform that I'm interested in. This specimen must have originated via either natural processes, or via supernatural intervention, there are no other readily apparent options.

Personally, I favor a naturalistic explanation to this origin. Others, yourself included, favor a supernatural explanation. However, until further evidence is produced as to the origin of life all we may do is speculate. Neither side may claim victory in this debate until they have evidence for their claim. Thus far, neither side has produced such evidence.



Jhud -> RE: Scientific Intelligence (10/11/2008 1:44:28 PM)

quote:

Why is it the overwhelming majority of species that have existed are extinct? Are they the designers failed attempts?


Well, to say that you would have to establish how long does a species has to exist before it would be considered a 'success '(difficult, as 'success' isn't a scientific measure, but a subjective one), and why the human designation of 'species' is the criteria one should use to demark the forms of life in consideration for that measure.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI