I say "Like all religious ideas, information theory makes no testable claims. It is therefore a complete fiction!"
It makes me shiver to see Atheist profess intentional, or perhaps in this case actual stupidity. And then defend it religiously. The sheer stupidity that it takes to makes such arguments is probably of the IQ charts entirely. So I am dedicating this thread to why some Atheists make the rest of us look more idiotic than theists that believe in a magic man made of nothing. It's pretty scary to see the lack of education in some people that don't even bother to educate themselves, or even listen to what they are saying in order to understand the stupidity of what it is that they are saying. :/ It's almost as if there is a fundamentalism growing in Atheism where Atheists start acting like theists, or start denying every aspect of reality as if Atheism meant to believe in the denial of reality. For six pages this person professed the denial of information whilst he happily sat there and used it. Even after I had asked him to try and post without it. O.o
It's actually sad that such people are in the gene pool, and I really hope they don't decide to breed. I generally don't see this kind of theistic behavior in Atheists, so I guess that is a good sign.
So what do you think of Atheists that behave like irrational theist fundamentalists?
There are a lot of areas of information theory that deal with a lot of things, or should I say pretty much everything. This includes math, logic, philosophy, data, patterns influencing other patterns, DNA, arrangements of atoms, quantum physics, entropy, to information processing information (computers, consciousness), or the storage of information ect.
Example refuted by the individual was as follows:
1) You can't reply without it
2) You can't know anything without it
3) You can't do anything without it
4) You can't exist without it
5) You can't be conscious without it
6) You can't even feel, have emotions, touch, smell, taste, or hear without it.
7) You can't have intelligence, knowledge, or the ability to think or process without it.
8) No phenomenon, process, or system can exist without it or it's base principles.
9) You can't convey, transmit, or express anything without information.
10) There can be no substance, function, or value without information.
1) "Information is any type of sensory input and output or source to inquiry."
2) "Information as a concept has many meanings, from everyday usage to technical settings. The concept of information is closely related to notions of constraint, communication, control, data, form, instruction, knowledge, meaning, mental stimulus, pattern, energy, perception, matter, and representation."
3) "Information is any type of pattern that influences the formation or transformation of other patterns. In this sense, there is no need for a conscious mind to perceive, much less appreciate the pattern." It's the sum representation of all things.. it's what gives things relevance, substance, and meaning... It's the core to anything that has an awareness or anything that exists...A self-awareness requires a base of inquiry! An intelligence Must have knowledge to apply!, A Self identity must have knowledge to know of itself! So far, the only claim I have made is that energy =/= information. Both substance and value. They are regarded here as two sides of the same coin.
1 facts provided or learned about something or someone:a vital piece of information
Lawa formal criminal charge lodged with a court or magistrate by a prosecutor without the aid of a grand jury:the tenant may lay an information against his landlord
2 what is conveyed or represented by a particular arrangement or sequence of things, or things of representation and value:genetically transmitted information
Computingdata as processed, stored, or transmitted by a computer.
(in information theory) a mathematical quantity expressing the probability of occurrence of a particular sequence of symbols, impulses, energy, matter., as contrasted with that of alternative sequences.
Things that are or can be known about a topic; Data that have been processed into a format, Any unambiguous abstract data, the smallest possible ...
1) Intelligence is only The ability to apply knowledge in order to perform better in an environment. Or the processing of knowledge to formulate a response to stimuli..
2) Wiki: "Intelligence (abbreviated int. or intel.) refers to discrete information with currency and relevance, and the abstraction, evaluation, and understanding of such information for its accuracy and value"
1) Knowledge is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as (i) expertise, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject, (ii) what is known in a particular field or in total; facts and information. Or it is awareness or familiarity gained by experience of a fact or situation.
2) Simple efficient definition: The collection of information on a subject or experience processed and then stored which provides a base for mechanisms such as intelligence, reason, choice, response, consciousness, and awareness... to which a method of inquiry must be based on. Hence, none of those can exist without first a base of inquiry, or the complex structure of information into a base of knowledge. There is a reason why one must always Know it exists in order to be conscious, aware, or even self-aware!
3) Knowledge is an organized body of information, or the comprehension and understanding consequent on having acquired and organized a body of facts:
Wiki: “Awareness is the state or ability to perceive, to feel, or to be conscious of events, objects or sensory patterns. In this level of consciousness, sensed data can be confirmed by an observer without necessarily implying understanding. To receive and respond to input.” Without information, value, or material physical property there can be no base to support an awareness.
What he is refuting is that information theory in general is not testable, not physical, nor seemingly required for anything above. I suspect he is a theist pretending to be an Atheist, but I can't yet make that hunch a fact. However, to say information theory is not testable and fiction is just retarded. Especially when the human language is entirely dependent on it. Without informational value there would be no means to exist or observe the world around us. Information in modern information theory goes on to state that information =/= energy as two sides of the same coin, or as both substance and value.
Thus I found it funny that he would post replies while arguing for information to be non-testable and thus fictitious. O.o
This is my first investigation of Information Theory, but it appears to be very "testable." I'm a math retard, but the concept of predicting probabilities for entropy in the communication of information looks pretty cool.
Here's wiki's layman's explanation:
Thanks for the contribution Edward Teach :) We can go on to say that our world operates on a cause and effect premise within a chaotic system to where order emerges from chaos. From a system with feedback. This deals with energy and the understanding of what the four stages of matter are. Thus it's regarded under information theory as:
3) "Information is any type of pattern that influences the formation or transformation of other patterns. In this sense, there is no need for a conscious mind to perceive, much less appreciate the pattern."
Things like sand dunes that are formed by grains of sand and wind. Or that the grains of sand are formed by the atoms and energy to which they are comprised of. This example includes the following:
“Two colors merging to form another color.. Or two color patterns coming together to form another pattern of color. Hence, the cause and effect process to where color is a representation of information even if it were black and white... Sound is another prime example..”
Other examples of information theory can include:
Does a tree still exist if it is cut down and burned as firewood? Technically everything that made the tree will always exist. All the matter and energy that made the tree will continue on, and become emergent or bound to other things. Purpose is never lost, and is always self-attained, and self-attaining. So the purpose of existence is simply to exist because the opposite is impossible.
A rock before you requires information to exist. This is to where itself is information, a structure of information, or source of out put and input. Hence, if there wasn't any information there to experience, perceive, or process, the rock simply would not exist!. Even empty space has information to offer!.
These are interesting mind exercises to get people to think about how information is conceived, understood, used, works, changes physically, or changes in definition and description by its mere physical changes. Thus when wood burns we observe a change of information and we thus apply new meanings and descriptions to the changes we observe. Thus it's stated that no information is ever lost or destroyed, it only changes form or meaning.
So how on Earth the individual can claim information to be fictitious is beyond me, and the worst part of it is that when I posted information theory I got an immediate ad hominem to which stated as follows:
Your points are incoherent and made up of your own fictional definition of how the world works. Are you a homeopath or psychic healer or some such fraud? The world wants to know.
And the funny part is, it's not even my description of the world, it's a collection of how scientists, engineers, information theorists, biologists, Cosmologists ect describe the world around us, and how meaning is given to that which we study and observe. This guy actually thinks all of this stuff is fictitious and it reminds me of Creationsists that think science is some kind of conspiracy. Or that Flat Earther's believe the Earth is Flat because science is magically a conspiracy. However, what makes me think this person is a theist playing as an Atheist is his posting of the 36 reasons for GOD's existence... But that could have been a devil's advocate argument. I just can't believe an Atheist would generally be this intentionally dumb, or get so religiously defensive and start making wild circular arguments that make no sense at all. :/
I almost suspect that I was attacked because I said a GOD or Jesus would be irrelevant because they couldn't exist without information lol.. As in, consciousness is too complex and can not exist without cause ;) Thus pretty much nullifying and concept of a deity existing as the cause of all causation o.O. Kind of like how I: = only a reference to all the information that gives I and Identity. I think that may have hit to close to home for this person? :/
This included areas in my contribution to Wikipedia.com under Omniscience:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omniscience#The_Omniscient_Creating_Kn...
our world operates on a cause and effect premise within a chaotic system to where order emerges from chaos
I love this! You're right, good mind exercise. Ok, it seems to me that "cause and effect" is the only real order, if order means a predictable pattern.
Humans are such pattern seeking organisms, I wonder how much order is real and how much is imposed (you know, the analogy where, after the fact, the marksman draws a circle around the most dense shot pattern and says, "Look how accurate I am.").
Also, does the universe move from choas to order... or is it a circlular movement from chaos to order, back to chaos, to order, etc.
Atoms organize to create me and this organization almost immediately begins to break down and then re-organize in a way that eliminates me and creates something else...
Basically yes :)
Everything in existence operates on 3 fundamental principles. And the same principles to which are also the 3 fundamental attributes of Energy and information from which complex arises from.
That is where information and energy are regarded as the same thing, or two sides of the same coin. Both substance and value. These 3 principles govern Chaos, and order from chaos. They are the same principles that govern evolution as well.
There can only ever be a positive, negative, or neutral:
Piece of information
existence (negative not existing)
Capacity (negative capacity impossible to exist)
mathematical equation, or solution
sate of being (negative state means no being is existent)
place (negative place doesn't exist)
Energy has 3 properties:
Ethics, emotion, feelings, morals all have 3 properties:
To better explain this.. I can provide how this works.
[url=http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/aparthib/evolutionary_morality.htm]www.mukto-mona.com[/url] "]- Aparthib
[quote] ...Moral instinct itself is rooted in the laws of nature (Physics) via the working of the brain. Morality is latent in the laws of nature. It finds expression through the process of evolution...[/quote]
For the newer members below are the links to the previous eight writeup in this series:
1. Science, Objectivity &; Postmodernism
2. Science vs. Mysticism &; Philosophy
3. Science, Logic, Faith, Beauty.. etc
4. Science, Miracles &; the Paranormal
5. On the Nature vs. Nurture Debate
6. A Scientific View of Life Death Immortality:
7. Brain and Religion
8. Freewill vs. Predestination
[b]You can also look at Morality in terms of mental addiction:[/b]
"A positive addiction is a beneficial habit--where the benefits outweigh the costs. A negative addiction is a detrimental habit—where the benefits are not worth the negative financial, physical, spiritual and mental costs. A neutral addiction is a habit in which it is not clear if the organism (or species) benefits from the activity."
In biology and energy, behavioral neutrals, positives and negatives are always present. So when you see them asking how does evolution support morality, we can address it because evolution is a positive and negative behavior itself! active matter exhibits these traits unconsciously. Evolution doesn't think about morality, it just selects from positives and negatives based on pattern interaction with other patterns that influence or exert pressure on any given pattern or set of patterns to swing one way or another. Hence, a species will either adapt in a positive or go extinct in a negative because it fails to apply a positive adaptation or behavior.. This is the same concept of moral behavior, and the evolution of moral behaviors.
Basically evolution is a prime example of neutral moral behavior to where it can swing from to a positive or a negative just like a neutral behavioral addiction can swing to a negative addiction, or to a positive addiction. This includes gray areas in between that can make such things vague or blurred. So human brains evolve to satisfy the above into a positive and beneficial mental addiction that can equate to the source purpose of "morality" within the human species. It's a positive and negative flow or balance to where one tends to usually be in a state of neutral addiction. A relative abstract perceptual and perpetual pendulum to which is apart of the system of order from chaos.
In layman's terms:[/size]
Things either don't change and stay neutral, or they take a positive or negative route! There is no outside to these fundamental rules!.
How Chaos theory, and evolution works in human behavior:
Academically, I am not that strong and never have that chance. I'd like to ask you a question "Are all men created equal?". Please, consider it as a small part of evolution question.
Firstly, you used the term "created" which is an attempt or perhaps a habit of injecting the assumption of Creation by design. But to answer your question in terms of evolution:
There are many aspects of evolution to which also include behavioral evolution.. Much like how fish will swim in schools for protection, man will find social groups to associate themselves with for many of the same reasons.. Human nature will segregate themselves into different social groups to where they never really ever fully equate other people outside their social group as equal.. Yes, it can happen, but evolution states that such things as equality as relative.. The other problem is, in chaotic systems such as human behavior, or evolution, there never is equality since everything is a dynamic and continuously emerging property of positive, negative, and neutral actions, reactions, responses, ideas, thoughts, levels of equality, emotion, feeling, adaptations, natural selections, choices, decisions, paths, morals, ethics, abilities, or possibilities of countless probabilities to which can not ever be 100% predictable or ever be static.
911 hits, where do I stand on human equality if it were my family killed in Tower 1? What possible routes will the evolution of my morality, ehtics, or stance on human equality take me? How much control do I have over this? Would I ever be the same?.. Sure I can make a choice to a limited degree, but evolution states that everyone isn't the same and will make any possible number of choices and changes because not everyone is the same. Especially in mental stability, states of mind, or in what control they have over their emotions. Thus, even though humans are intelligent, the entire system remains Chaotic like to which can not be predicted with any sort of real certainty.
This is why Chaos theory holds true.. Even in human nature. And this why positve, negative, and neutral in information theory are the foundation, and principles (laws) to which govern everything!
Here is a good series on Youtube: "The Secret Life of Chaos"
A Series 1-6
Or you can explore Chaos theory and Cybernetics:
These are about systems that self-organize through chaos through the coupling of positive and negative feedback loops. The same processes that drive our own Consciousness, awareness, and behaviors. Without positive and negative feedback there can be no system to support consciousness or the system of Observation and perception of observation. We could have no language, understanding, or ability to even make a choice or decision without the basic 3 fundamental principles (laws) of information theory that so happens to be the same basic principle laws of nature and energy itself.
Very interesting. I'm going to have to process the application of these principles to the subject of morality. When referring to the physical realm, the terms "positive" and "negative" are about adding and subtracting. When the same terms are used in a discussion of morality, they are synonyms for "good" and "bad." (equivocation fallacy)
Our sense of "good and bad" is, too a HUGE degree, learned. Broken down, morality is just one small aspect of the learned socialization process.
It is apples and oranges when we compare the moral code of ancient Romans to the moral code of modern Americans. Morals represent preferences and norms more than universal rules.
Feral children manifest no moral sense. Likewise, social animals raised with no social contact don't behave by the social rules of their species.