Re: The Second Law of Intelligence
- From: "bullpup" <bullpup@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 22:19:20 -0500
"Zoe" <muze10@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:cn3nf2d0t8mqg52qe22q4gv85nfmlbhnhh@xxxxxxxxxx
The laws of intelligence are languishing on the table, awaiting more
precise description. I think I'll take a break from the first law for
a bit (as if I haven't already) and rethink along different lines for
a better description of what can be termed a second law.
But to recap...
The First Law of Intelligence (FLOI or 1LOI) says: The level of order
in a system is directly proportional to the level of applied
intelligence/mental activity.
The second Law of Intelligence (SLOI or 2LOI) says: Base-line synergy
(as seen in conditions in a system that depend totally on each other
for existence) is always the result of applied intelligence/mental
activity.
Evidence?
Consider an inflated balloon. The rounded configuration of helium
molecules inside a balloon could never exist in that formation without
being trapped by its external surroundings of rubber. And the expanded
rubber would never exist in its expanded state without the trapped air
molecules within it. This condition would be what can be termed
*base-line synergy, the starting point of co-dependence at which a
system or state of being comes into existence.
The familiar question then is: Which came first, the rubber or the
air?
The answer, based on observation, is that neither came first. Rather,
the two conditions were brought together at the same time as a result
of purpose, intent, and directed mental activity.
Since no other agency/mechanism has been observed to create base-line
synergy in items generally accepted to be the result of mental
activity, it is reasonable and scientific to conclude that any system
that demonstrates base-line synergy must be a result of purpose,
intent, and directed mental activity.
So, sea foam which is composed of bubbles (Or any other examples of bubbles
which occur in nature), which are the same as little gas filled balloons,
are the result of purpose, intent, and directed mental activity? Sorry, I
don't see that as valid evidence for ID.
Some examples:
The chicken and the egg.
The seed and the tree.
The protein produced by a system that itself is made of protein.
Any of which are also the product of evolution, or biochemistry, with no
evidence of any form of "purpose", "intent" or evidence of "directed mental
activity". You fall into the same logic trap again, and again: it exists,
therfore it's designed" is what your "evidence" always boils down to.
Before moving blithely on to the Third Law of Intelligence (TLOI or
3LOI), let me once again pause for input......
*(If "base-line synergy" is an unsatisfactory term, please for
suggestions/corrections.)
In context, "wishful thinking", would work just as well.
Boikat
--
"I reject your reality, and substitute my own"
-Adam Savage, Mythbusters-
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Second Law of Intelligence
- From: Zoe
- Re: The Second Law of Intelligence
- References:
- The Second Law of Intelligence
- From: Zoe
- The Second Law of Intelligence
- Prev by Date: Re: Will this test pull the last failed repost with it?
- Next by Date: Re: The Second Law of Intelligence
- Previous by thread: The Second Law of Intelligence
- Next by thread: Re: The Second Law of Intelligence
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
