(M.H-35)"Standard" Argument for Irreducible Complexity

[Baggins]

Well your arguments have the value of the dog poop in my back yard. a first grade could destroy you in a debate

Carry on. Your lack of logic is apparent with eah additional post

This is the kind of stuff I like, comedy gold.

If you had any argument at all you wouldn't resort to name calling ( which has got you banned once, James, and looks likely to get you banned again ), you would deploy your argument and get plaudits.

But you'd prefer to deploy dog poop.

How old are you?

 

[Tomk80]

We are both

How do you meaure overall complexity? How do you measure which is more complex, our brains, the eyes of a hawk + it's flying ability, the sonar of a dolphin + it's swimminig ability.
If you say we are more complex, I can only think that you have figured out some overall measurement of complexity that allows us to structurally compare those three and many others and make a comparison an objective comparison. The biological community is probably very interested in your answer as well.

Nothing is mixed up. It is clear we have more overall ability than any other creature. Any sense or ability that we lack physically can be made up for via intelligence and our intelligence allows us to build machines that surpass anything in the natural world and and actually put us ahead of them

Yes, you keep mixing up terms. You keep mixing up complexity, capability, advancement etc, while all of those denote different properties and they are not necessarily comparable. Just saying they are is not much of an argument.
To take an example, we may well be more capable than a dolphin, given that we can build things that simulate what dolphins do (somewhat). However, that is only the result of a complex brain. But even there we already get in a problem in comparing complexity, because the brain of a dolphin has to perform many tasks that we do not, for example determining place from it's sonar signals. How do we know that the brian of a dolphin is not more complex, but that the reason it hasn't got our cognitive ability is that the processes are used for other tasks. How do you compare the complexity of both brains? Complexity is not a function of capability, but a function of structure.

I disagree.

I do not.
I do.
I do not.
I do.

Yay

 

[pittguy579]

If you say we are more complex, I can only think that you have figured out some overall measurement of complexity that allows us to structurally compare those three and many others and make a comparison an objective comparison. The biological community is probably very interested in your answer as well.

In terms of overall ability

Yes, you keep mixing up terms.

No I do not
.

To take an example, we may well be more capable than a dolphin, given that we can build things that simulate what dolphins do (somewhat). However, that is only the result of a complex brain. But even there we already get in a problem in comparing complexity, because the brain of a dolphin has to perform many tasks that we do not, for example determining place from it's sonar signals. How do we know that the brian of a dolphin is not more complex, but that the reason it hasn't got our cognitive ability is that the processes are used for other tasks. How do you compare the complexity of both brains? Complexity is not a function of capability, but a function of structure.

We can do everything a dolphin can do via our intelligence. The reverse is not true. That is the same thing for any other creature on earth. We may not have all of their innate abilities, but we can utilize intelligence to mimic or get the same results done because the bottom line is results/function is what is essential. With our intelligence, we can build systems that mimic and surpass anything found in nature and hence our abilities surpass those of any other creature.

 

[Edx]

So pittguy ignores me.

 

[Baggins]

We can do everything a dolphin can do via our intelligence. The reverse is not true. That is the same thing for any other creature on earth. We may not have all of their innate abilities, but we can utilize intelligence to mimic or get the same results done because the bottom line is results/function is what is essential. With our intelligence, we can build systems that mimic and surpass anything found in nature and hence our abilities surpass those of any other creature.

And this has got what to do do with evolutionary capability?

 

[Tomk80]

In terms of overall ability

But that is not equivalent to complexity, as I already explained.

No I do not

Yes you do. I asked you to explain how you measure complexity, and you answer by saying ability. But ability and complexity are not the same thing. We are the best tool-users, true. But that doesn't even mean we have the best overall ability, and definitely isn't the equivalent of complexity. You do mix up terms, you do it in this very post.

We can do everything a dolphin can do via our intelligence. The reverse is not true. That is the same thing for any other creature on earth. We may not have all of their innate abilities, but we can utilize intelligence to mimic or get the same results done because the bottom line is results/function is what is essential. With our intelligence, we can build systems that mimic and surpass anything found in nature and hence our abilities surpass those of any other creature.

But that doesn't mean we are the most complex. Again, you are mixing up complexity and ability.

 

[pittguy579]

]But that is not equivalent to complexity, as I already explained.

It is equivalent, for all intents and purposes, as I have explained

Yes you do. I asked you to explain how you measure complexity, and you answer by saying ability. But ability and complexity are not the same thing. We are the best tool-users, true. But that doesn't even mean we have the best overall ability, and definitely isn't the equivalent of complexity. You do mix up terms, you do it in this very post.

If we have more overall ability than any other creature, then we are the most complex in terms of function

But that doesn't mean we are the most complex. Again, you are mixing up complexity and ability

I am not mixing anything up

 

[Tomk80]

It is equivalent, for all intents and purposes, as I have explained

And you are incorrect, as I and others have explained at length. What you say doesn't even hold in engineering, let alone in biology.

If we have more overall ability than any other creature, then we are the most complex in terms of function

No, we are the most capable. Complexity tells us something about structure, in this case the structural make-up of the brain. But how do you determine that the structure of our brain is more complex than the structure of the brain of a dolphin, especially when they have capabilities we lack and we have capabilities they lack, that are not comparable.

I am not mixing anything up

Yes, you are mixing up capable, advanced and complex, terms that are not interchangable.

 

[Edx]

If we have more overall ability than any other creature, then we are the most complex in terms of function

So if we invent an robot with a super computer for a brain, but can hardly walk, cant see all too well and cant hear that great...but can with its super robot brain come up with ways to conquer most of the world....

You say this means the robot is more complex in every way, just because of that brain?

 

[pittguy579]

And you are incorrect, as I and others have explained at length. What you say doesn't even hold in engineering, let alone in biology.

And I am correct. And it holds up

No, we are the most capable. Complexity tells us something about structure, in this case the structural make-up of the brain. But how do you determine that the structure of our brain is more complex than the structure of the brain of a dolphin, especially when they have capabilities we lack and we have capabilities they lack, that are not comparable.

Our brains are clearly more complex and have more overall horsepower than a dolphin.

Yes, you are mixing up capable, advanced and complex, terms that are not interchangable

I am not mixing anything up

 

[Tomk80]

And I am correct. And it holds up

No it doesn't
Yes it does
no it doesn't

Our brains are clearly more complex and have more overall horsepower than a dolphin.

How have you measured that? Have you compared there structures?

I am not mixing anything up[/quote]
Yes you have
No I haven't
Yes you have

 

[Edx]

Our brains are clearly more complex and have more overall horsepower than a dolphin.

I told you 3 times now and each time you have ignored me, you cant say that without coming up with a scientific way of measuring that complexity.

Ed

 

[Tomk80]

This thread makes me curious. Does anyone have specific sources on how terms like complexity, capability etc are used in engineering and if there are objective measurements for them, how they are measured?

Pittguy says he is an engineer, but the way he uses the terms is contrary to the way I've ever heard other engineers or scientists talk about them, so having some sources esxplain their use would be cool.

 

[OdwinOddball]

I know its immpossible to not rubberneck the wreck this thread has become, its just too amusing the depths someone will dig there own holes.

But I still have to say it.

Don't feed the troll...

 

[michabo]

This thread makes me curious. Does anyone have specific sources on how terms like complexity, capability etc are used in engineering and if there are objective measurements for them, how they are measured?

I've estimated the complexity of writing software before, and studied the complexity of data.

For software or algorithms in general, the complexity of a given algorithm would be the minimal number of nodes required by a Turing Machine to create a solution. This is related to data complexity, where it would be the minimal representation of the data, which still retains all of the information.

This can result in some curious differences between our intuition and this more precise definition. For example, fractals have an infinitely complex surface structure, but the algorithm to generate them can be written in a few lines. If we were to try to represent them as a bitmap or as a picture, the complexity would be enormous. If we represented them as an equation or a program, the complexity would be minor.

 

[Split Rock]

Our brains are clearly more complex and have more overall horsepower than a dolphin.

This is flat-out wrong. Cetacean brains are as complex as our own, and the largest brains on the planet belong to whales.

"Only in primates and cetaceans does the brain possess any significant amount of encephalization. As a matter of fact, cetacean brains have much more encephalization than human brains. For example a dolphin brain (one of the smaller of the cetaceans) has 40% more cerebral cortex than a human (Morgane 1974). The human cerebral cortex is divided into rather distinct layers, and it is believed that this indicates a higher level of complexity and development over those which lack the layering... The cetacean cerebral cortex is as layered as our own. The individual layers are similar or even identical between the two. "
from: http://www.msu.edu/user/marablek/whal-int.htm#sect1

Are you just guessing with this stuff, or are you making assumptions based on your bias about humans being superior to all other life?

 

[b*unique]

Mod hat on

Unfortunately,some members keep arguing and offending each other,.
this is my last warning,please do not flame and bait each other.

Thank you
Mod hat off

 

[Elduran]

This thread makes me curious. Does anyone have specific sources on how terms like complexity, capability etc are used in engineering and if there are objective measurements for them, how they are measured?

Pittguy says he is an engineer, but the way he uses the terms is contrary to the way I've ever heard other engineers or scientists talk about them, so having some sources esxplain their use would be cool.

They're not to my knowledge. Remember that engineering isn't really a science, and offers very little insight into science outside a very narrow view of materials and thermodynamics. This is coming from an ex engineer by the way

Also remember that trains have what are sometimes called engineers

 

[pittguy579]

This is flat-out wrong. Cetacean brains are as complex as our own, and the largest brains on the planet belong to whales.

So you are saying dolphins are smarter than us? Dolphin brains have more problem solving ability than we do?
Really, is that what you are saying?
Size doesn't matter. Output does. Output in a brain is measured by intelligence.

Are you just guessing with this stuff, or are you making assumptions based on your bias about humans being superior to all other life

No bias, It is a fact

 

[c'mon sense]

Size doesn't matter. Output does.

See, if we can agree on that, then why do you insist that by taking away, erosion has reduced complexity in the hunk of rock? The arch looks much more complex than a whole load of non-descript lump. Clearly, in the case of the rock, the same (bridging structure) has been achieved with less, hence output is greater relative to total mass of rock necessary. Don't you think? Complexity doesn't always mean more or larger, it means that interactions between parts are more subtle, more elegant, efficient, and yeah, generally achieving more with less.