re:fine tuning

From: Terry M. Gray (grayt@lamar.colostate.edu)
Date: Fri Apr 11 2003 - 15:24:28 EDT

  • Next message: Howard J. Van Till: "Re: fine tuning"

    Debbie,

    In case you are unfamiliar with him, I'd point you to some books by
    Stuart Kauffman:

    Origins of Order (very technical and nearly impossible to read)
    At Home in the Universe (better)
    Investigations

    Kauffman's no believer as far as I can tell, but does criticize
    current Darwinian and origin of life models. He develops some new
    ideas that overcome many of the difficulties of the traditional
    formulations, especially in biological areas. There's a nice chapter
    on Kauffman in the book Arificial Life by Steven Levy. It's a great
    introduction to Kauffman and to the field in general.

    Kauffman develops a very different view of the origin of life:

      "...this new view, which is based on the discovery of an expected
    phase transition from a collection of polymers which do not reproduce
    themselves to a slightly more complex collection of polymers which do
    jointly catalyze their own reproduction. In this theory of the
    origin of life, it is not necessary that any molecule reproduce
    itself. Rather, a collection of molecules has the property that the
    last step in the formation of each molecule is catalyzed by some
    molecule in the system. The phase transition occurs when some
    critical complexity level of molecular diversity is surpassed. At
    that critical level, the ratio of reactions among the polymers to the
    number of polymers in the system passes a critical value, and a
    connected web of catalyzed reactions linking the polymers arises and
    spans the molecular species in the system. This web constitutes the
    crystallization of catalytic closure such that the system of polymers
    becomes collectively self reproducing ... [this new body of theory]
    is also robust in leading to a fundamental new conclusion: Molecular
    systems, in principle, can both reproduce and evolve without having a
    genome in the familiar sense of a template-replicating molecular
    species." (p. 285, Origins of Order)

    Loren Haarsma and I have a chapter length discussion of this in a
    book called Perspectives on an Evolving Creation (ed. Keith Miller)
    due out from Eerdmans later this year.

    Also, just to say again what I've said a lot in these discussions, in
    my view there's a sense in which God is continually tuning in his
    providential care and that there is no such thing as "untuned or
    random" (from God's perspective). But from our point of view as
    scientists, it looks untuned and random. A believer will detect
    tuning and design by faith knowing of God's providence and care. In
    other words knowledge of design (and the designer) precedes the
    detection of design! The unbeliever won't detect it or will attribute
    it ultimately to other things compatible with his/her worldview
    (Dawkins' "apparent design" produced only and *ultimately* by natural
    selection. There's much in Dawkins I can agree with, i.e. natural
    selection does produce things that are fine tuned. Of course, I
    disagree with the "only and ultimately" part. The providential hand
    of God works through natural selection.

    TG

    >Someone fill me in on the rules to replying on this system. Or the
    >rules in general.
    >
    >To: Howard
    >
    >I disagree with your interpretation on biology. The contention is
    >that leaving the development of life to an untuned or random system
    >means that the conditions just don't add up. In other words God
    >WOULD have to tune the conditions in order for life to have
    >developed as it did within the calculated age of the universe. I
    >believe this is a successful argument on the part of ID, just using
    >indirect methods instead of direct. "Proving by contradiction."
    > By the way, Robert Shapiro declares himself to be a Skeptic. He
    >does not profess Christianity, or even belief in God in his books.
    >He simply finds fault with everybody else's work. I guess that,
    >according to him, none of us can exist.
    >
    >
    >Debbie Mann, PE
    >Debbie Mann Consulting
    >(765)477-1776
    >
    >

    -- 
    _________________
    Terry M. Gray, Ph.D., Computer Support Scientist
    Chemistry Department, Colorado State University
    Fort Collins, Colorado  80523
    grayt@lamar.colostate.edu  http://www.chm.colostate.edu/~grayt/
    phone: 970-491-7003 fax: 970-491-1801
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Apr 11 2003 - 15:24:42 EDT