RE: Can God be seen in the maths?
July 8, 2017 at 8:25 am
(This post was last modified: July 8, 2017 at 8:38 am by The Grand Nudger.)
It's not surprising that one information system is like another, particularly in a universe where both systems are constrained by the same natural laws and work for precisely the same reasons. People who say "dna is like a computer program" have that comparison entirely backwards. It's not even a very apt comparison, since dna isn't so much a computer program as it is a machine language. Programming happens at a higher level of architecture, and in humans.,....the programming would be our state of mind, our referents and our memories and our concepts. Machine language is just a description of the machines functions, and provides a basis for higher level operations like programming. Just like DNA does.
In my opinion, it's just a fascination with the amazing that leads a person, even a smart person, to conflate two amazing things as somehow the same thing or one being part and parcel of the other. Flew thinks that computers are amazing, and dna is amazing, and god is amazing...ergo, god. Ultimately, any argument from design is an argument from incredulity...but I find arguments referring to computers to be the most ironic form of support for designing gods.....since we know, for a fact, that computers don't actually require designers. That they can be arrived upon by iterative pass/fail testing not at all unlike mechanical evolutionary processes.
If biological computers -did- require a designer...they'd be a special case, and for no apparent reason. Evem then.."superintelligent" isn't exactly the word I'd use for the designer of said biological computers...particularly since we use mechanical computers to overcome the flaws inherent in our own architectures -whatever they are-. Some superintelligence, beaten at the game by a jumped up ape playing with toy clocks.
In my opinion, it's just a fascination with the amazing that leads a person, even a smart person, to conflate two amazing things as somehow the same thing or one being part and parcel of the other. Flew thinks that computers are amazing, and dna is amazing, and god is amazing...ergo, god. Ultimately, any argument from design is an argument from incredulity...but I find arguments referring to computers to be the most ironic form of support for designing gods.....since we know, for a fact, that computers don't actually require designers. That they can be arrived upon by iterative pass/fail testing not at all unlike mechanical evolutionary processes.
If biological computers -did- require a designer...they'd be a special case, and for no apparent reason. Evem then.."superintelligent" isn't exactly the word I'd use for the designer of said biological computers...particularly since we use mechanical computers to overcome the flaws inherent in our own architectures -whatever they are-. Some superintelligence, beaten at the game by a jumped up ape playing with toy clocks.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
