[Assam] “WE WILL REMOVE THIS SITE IF PROVEN WRONG”: Series of logical articles from THE site posted here to prepare for the challenge, as some people in Assam even using loud speakers to spread their message without a challenge. Article 9: Chance etc.

[Bartta Bistar]

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/chance_or_intelligence.htm Chance
or Intelligence?
------------------------------

Is this universe formed by chance or was it created by an intelligent being?
There is an article published in many Islamic sites called Chance or
Intelligence by ANALYS. http://www.islaam.com/articles/chance_or.htm

It argues,

"This Universe, indeed displays a remarkable vista of order and
consistency.. …. Reflection may lead us to pertinent questions: Could such
encompassing order have arisen purely by unintentioned accident? Or could
there be an intelligent originator to this spectacular array of living and
non-living forms —a designer that may have developed them through processes,
which have yet to be fully determined? What conclusions are evidential?

Is it probable that all the letters on this page unscrambled themselves by
chance to form these meaningful and structured sentences? How then, could a
human being - with ears, eyes and a mind - have been formed by chance? Is it
credible that such a vast universe with an inestimable billions of galaxies
could have evolved by accident?"

Then after making a list of similar questions it concludes that

"We know that we are not the cause of ourselves, for embryonic development
is organized and directed in stages under natural laws. But directed by what
and by whose laws? Chance? Or Intelligence?"

The article goes on to disprove polytheism by saying that it would not be
possible because the result "would have be disordered and chaotic due to the
conflicting commands of these infinitely powerful entities... Instead of
rain, we might conceivably have received a heavy downpour of elephants from
the skies."

With this he suggest that there must be only one God. Who "must have created
and developed all living and non-living things".

Then he goes on to say that "the myriad forms of matter and energy as well
as the physiological structure of the human being must be subject to the
natural laws of this singular and independent governing intelligence."

And concludes that a reasonable person "would be naturally drawn to the
logical conclusion of the existence of a unique originator"

*****

In this article the author makes a valid assumption and draws an invalid
conclusion. He observes that, "this Universe, displays a remarkable vista of
order and consistency". He rightly says that "the myriad forms of matter and
energy as well as the physiological structure of the human being must be
subject to the natural laws of (a) singular and independent governing
intelligence." But with no reason concludes that this "governing
intelligence" is Muhammad's Allah, to the extent that he unreasonably claims
"A reasoning person would be naturally drawn to the logical conclusion of
the existence of a unique originator... and therefore must be a Muslim."

I agree that there is a "governing intelligence" in the universe. But to
assume that that governing Intelligence is the god of Islam as described in
the Quran is not tenable.

If the creation of this universe was teleological, if there was a purposeful
creator behind the locomotive of evolution, then there must be life in all
the planets. Or one could say that God is a sloppy creator for he often
fails to produce life in most of the planets and succeeds only in a few. The
fact that none of the planets in our solar system is livable is proof that
it is by accident and not by intent that life has appeared in our planet. It
is merely an accident that we humans have evolved as such. This accident
occurred 65 million years ago when a giant asteroid hit the Earth,
eliminating the dinosaurs and making this planet viable for the mammals to
flourish.

The whole creation is the result of accidents. Take for example the
pollination of flowers. Millions of pollens are carried by the wind and
accidentally some of them fall on the stigma and fertilize it. The same
lottery is played when millions of human sperms are released and only one
has the chance to hit the ovum. What happens to the rest of the sperms? What
was their destiny? Why they were created? If there was a teleological
design, why so much waste? Why so much fatality?

Creationists make the example of a monkey behind a typewriter. They ask,
"What are the chances that a monkey type Shakespeare's Hamlet?" I admit that
the chances are slim. But the example of one monkey behind the typewriter is
not appropriate to explain the mechanism of evolution.

Evolution takes place by trial and errors. There are hundreds of billions of
galaxies in this Universe. Each galaxy contains hundreds of billions of
stars. Each star hosts a number of planets. What are the chances that some
of those planets have the right condition to host life? The answer is
staggering. That is simple mathematics. In other words, despite the fact
that planets that can nurture life are relatively few (let us say they are
one in million) given the astronomical vastness of the universe the number
of potentially life supporting planets is mind boggling. But if only one in
a million planets are capable of hosting life, that is chance.

Now consider how many atoms are in the Earth? The number is incredibly high.
Suppose other potentially life supporting planets are the same size as the
Earth and what has happened and is happening here, has, is or will happen in
those planets as well. Now let us consider the Earth and see how it gave
birth to life. The chances that suddenly atoms get together and form an
intelligent human being like Adam and Eve, is virtually none. But their
chance of getting together and forming simple molecules is very high. In
fact since so many atoms are constantly trying to interact under the right
conditions, it is almost inconceivable that they don't succeed. It would be
like zillions of monkeys each given a typewriter typing 24/7 for billions of
years and all they have to do is type a simple word. Not a phrase, not a
book, just a simple word! It is not hard to imagine that there will be
innumerable monkeys who will type many correct words. And of course they
will write a lot more words that have no meaning. Even if the chance of
writing a correct word is one in a million, considering the huge number of
monkeys and the immense time given, even with such a slim chance,
dictionaries can be written.

The next stage is to put these words with meaning together and make simple
phrases that make sense. Now imagine that you have a word processor that
does not type letters but complete words. What would be the chance for those
monkeys pressing the right keys on this specifically designed keyboard to
come up with a sensible phrase? Given billions of years and an infinite
number of monkeys, the answer is obviously pretty high.

This is the way evolution takes place. It might have taken millions of years
for atoms to take form. But once they are formed, the Mother Nature uses
them as the building blocks to build simple molecules. Those simple
molecules are used as the building blocks for the creation of complex and
mega molecules, proteins, acids, fats, etc. These newly formed molecules
along with the simple molecules haphazardly interact with each other. A vast
number of these chemical interactions, in fact the majority of them, produce
nothing. But one in a million of these combinations give birth to simple
living organisms.

It has long been thought that fundamental biological property was the sole
preserve of the nucleic acids that make up the genes of living organisms.
But recently Reza Ghadiri's group at Scripps Research Center in La Jolla,
California, demonstrated that small proteins can also self-replicate.
Therefore once life is established, a DNA is created or even a protein is
formed, there is no necessity to re-create it. It will keep catalyzing or
replicating itself.

However when the DNAs replicate, mistakes happen. And those mistakes are
responsible for the mutation of living organisms. That is why no two grains
of wheat are exactly the same. It is not a miracle of God but the way genes
are copied. Most of these mutations are insignificant and affect only the
appearance of the organism. Many of them are fatal; those organisms with
fatal mutations do not survive to pass the defective genes to future
generations. However, some of those mutations are innovations that allow the
species to survive better in its environment. These genetic mutations that
happen constantly within every cell of every living being is in fact
responsible for the diversity of life in this planet.

Some religionists speak of "intelligent design". This is not science. If
evolution was directed by an intelligent being, at least the majority of
mutations would have been a gain for the organism. This is not so. Most
mutations are fatal. Mutations that help the organism to adapt to its
environment better, are extremely rare. This clearly shows that there is no
intelligent being directing the evolution. The evolution happens very much
by chance. It happens when a change in the environment kills most of the
members of one spices allowing only a small percentage with specific traits
to survive. This minute group then pass those traits to their offspring and
that is how species evolve. They evolve through fatality, through death and
destruction of the majority.

As you see there is no hand of God at work here! In fact if an intelligent
God was responsible for the design of this universe, one could question his
justice. For it does not seem to be fair that some creatures are intended to
become food for others, or be born defective. Pretty cruel and unfair for a
powerful and loving God!

*****

Well, as I said I am not an atheist; I am not a deist and definitely not a
theist.

Let us go back to our monkeys and their typewriters. They type quite
unintelligently  and accidentally some of those words that they type have
meanings. What is it that makes those words with meanings different from
those that are meaningless? That is the question! We will come back to that.
Now let us consider the process of evolution. Thousands or millions of
combinations produce nothing. But some are evolutionary successes and are
replicated in the subsequent combinations. What is it that makes those
successful combinations standout from the rest?

Here is the answer to the above questions. In the case of the words, there
must be a language and a grammar for the words and phrases to make sense.
Without a language all the words are meaningless. In the case of the
evolution there must be a pre-established set of laws, an order or a
principle that would give meaning to the successful combinations. This may
be better explained with another example. Take the example of typewriting
monkeys and replace the monkeys with ignorant men and the words with a radio
receiver. You give all necessary components that go in a radio to these men
who don't know anything about electronics and tell them to play with those
components and see what they come up with. (I replaced the monkeys with
people because I needed them with some manual dexterity. But as far as their
mental capacities let us assume that they are imbeciles and deprived of any
intelligence) If we have infinite number of imbeciles with infinite number
of components can't some of them by pure coincidence put together a radio
receiver that actually works? Of course the chances are extremely high. Even
if one in a million of them succeed, we will have huge number of radios that
work. For each good radio that works, we have also have millions that don't
work. This is not design. This is chance.

So given the chances a radio can be built completely by accident. No
intelligence is required. In this example many components would have gone to
waste to make one radio that works. That is exactly the way nature operates.
An infinite number of planets are there, but only a few of them have the
right temperature, right atmosphere and enough water to support life.
Millions of pollens are scattered but only one may fall on the right female
flower to become a fruit. Millions of sperms are released, but only one of
them may have a chance to hit the ovum. This law is universal and precludes
the teleology and intelligent design. .

But the point I am trying to make here is why the radio works only when its
components are integrated in a specific combination? Only one combination is
the right one and the rest are not. What is happening is that when the right
combination is achieved, the radio produces a sound. Is the sound or the
music generated, from the radio? Of course not! The radio is only a
receiver. The music is played not from within but from outside the radio.
The same thing is true with the words. Words by themselves have no meaning.
The meaning is given to them. The same is also true when molecules form a
cell and life appears in them quite miraculously. Here we witness that the
whole is more than the sum of the parts. Is the life a by-product of the
living organism? Maybe it is not! Maybe the life is reflected in the matter
in the same way that the sound is received by the radio, or the light
appears in the electric bulb. Therefore life must exist beyond the matter as
the sound exists beyond the radio.

Life is merely one of the earlier expressions of existence. There is
intelligence, love, justice and many other qualities that more evolved
animals, especially we humans posses. These qualities if not entirely absent
in the inanimate world of matter their existence is negligible. Wherefrom
these faculties come? A religious minded person might exclaim "God". But as
I demonstrated, a purposeful God, as described in the Semitic sacred books,
has no role in the evolution. All these attributes are part of the Single
Principle. The universe therefore is not chaotic but an orderly one. It has
not been created by an intelligent being, but there is a Principle
underlying its creation. Law and order govern all things. A Single Principle
permeates all the existence. The Principle defines how things happen and the
evolution is the process of that eternal happening. If you feel comfortable
and do not confuse that Principle with Allah or Jehovah, you may call it
God. But the Principle is not a being. This God is neither a he nor a she.
It is IT. You cannot talk to God nor God talks back to you. God does not
send messengers nor he cares bout you. God is not intelligent but it is
Intelligence. God is not loving but It is Love. God is not wise,
compassionate, merciful or just but It is wisdom, compassion, mercy and
justice. God dose not have attributes because God is not a thing. It is not
a being. God is a non-being. The non-being is the mother of all beings. God
is the Principle and the evolution is the process. God is HOW and the rest
is WHAT! That is all there is, HOW and WHAT.

God cannot be defined, but it can be understood. There are two ways to
understand God. One is through the reflection of the world within,  the
inner world, and the other is by observing the world without, the outer
world. The first method is through meditation and the second is by
scientific observation. We can know God and we can experience God but no one
can lead us to It.

I agree that there is a superior intelligence and a principle that make this
world go round. There is a Single Principle underlying the creation. The
Universe is governed by natural laws that are eternal.

You may ask WHAT caused these laws to appear. The answer is nothing! If
these laws are eternal then they cannot have any cause. Now you may say that
any law needs a legislator. Then I ask you who created that legislator? You
see? It is much easier to accept that laws are self-subsisting than accept
that there is a self-subsisting legislator. If we are going to accept the
existence of God as a dogma, something for which we have no evidence but
accept it anyway, then why not accept the dogma that natural laws have been
there always? This is far easier to digest. For example, 2+2=4. This is a
principle. It will not change and it is eternal. Now isn't it more logical
to believe that this law exists on its own and no one created it than assume
that a deity made 2+2=4? If God did not exist and the universe did not exist
could it be possible that 2+2 be something different than 4?



Someone  asked; "If we are just made by atoms forming together and our
creation was an accident then how do you explain the soul that you believe
in? Atoms cannot form together and make a soul can they? So where did the
soul come from? It has to be from god doesn't it?"

This is a subject that none of us can be certain and sure of. Those who
pretend that they are, are just charlatans. What we are doing is
speculating. That is all we can do at this moment until science comes up
with a good answer. My guess is as good as yours. However there are some
explanations that are outright ridiculous. What we read in the Bible and the
Quran are of this last category.

I share my thoughts on this subject not as the answer but as my contribution
to the vast pool of human understanding. I am still thinking and I am still
learning. I am of the belief that we shall one day know the truth just as we
finally came to know the truth about the shape of the Earth and it happened
to be much different from what religions used to tell us. Until then all we
can do is to speculate.

I believe that there is an infinite ocean of pure reality that is neither
outside nor inside the creation. I call It the Single Principle. That
reality, is not a substance, it does not have a being. It is the law of
creation. As matter evolves, it absorbs and reflects a portion of that
infinite reality. Life for example is a manifestation of that reality. It
reflects in the living organism when this comes together in that specific
combination. In other words the living being becomes an instrument, or
better said, a receptacle of that ultimate reality. The more complex is the
being the sharper are its antennae and the more reality is reflect in it.

Take the example of a radio receiver and a television set. One can receive
only sounds while the other can receive sounds and images. Some TVs are
black and white while others can also receive and transmit colors. Compare
this to the millions of life forms that are pullulating in this planet (and
who knows how many outside this planet). Each life form is an instrument,
they all are organized or built in a way that they can capture life, but
then each has specialized in a different way and each reflects hundreds or
thousands of other unique forms of the Reality. In other words, we are all
instruments, each reflecting different aspects of the same Reality.

This process is not unlike the light of the sun reflecting on different
objects in this world. The light is the same yet once it shines on the
planet it is reflected back in millions of colors, hues and shades. Each
object reflects that light according to its own capacity, shape or texture,
yet these objects are not luminaries on their own. They do not emanate
light. They are simply reflecting the colorless light of the Sun.

I believe this is what is happening with the world of the creation. The
mater reflects the Reality and that portion of the Reality reflected in the
matter is the spirit of the being.

Humans are complex instruments; therefore they reflect the ultimate Reality
to a higher degree. The reflection of the Reality or the Single Principle in
humans is what we call human spirit. Therefore if what I say make any sense,
the human spirit is not the product of the matter. It is not born out of the
combination of the atoms but is reflected in the body of humans when that is
formed, the way light is reflected in a mirror. This would make all humans,
animals and as a matter of fact all beings, whether living or inanimate,
imbued from the same Reality. We are all manifestations of the Single
Principle. To say this in a more familiar language, we are all children of
the same God.

I hope that this answer trigger the process of thinking in you and you come
up with better answers. But remember that thoughts are not the only means of
understanding. Once the mind is ready it can perceive much higher hidden
knowledge by intuition. But you have to doubt first. Doubt all preconceived
and antiquated beliefs, think and meditate. If haply you find the answer, or
an answer that satisfies you most, please teach me too.

Ali Sina



Added 2006/06/30

I found the following article on artificial intelligence that if true, it
would not only invalidate my above assumption that matter reflects a higher
reality it also eliminates the need for God.

*Release date:* February 03, 2005

A pioneering new way of creating computer programs could be used in the
future to design and build robots with minds that function like that of a
human being, according to a leading researcher at The University of
Reading<http://www.extra.rdg.ac.uk/news/details.asp?ID=471>
.

Dr James Anderson, of the University's Department of Computer Science, has
developed for the first time the 'perspective simplex', or *Perspex*, which
is a way of writing a computer program as a geometrical structure, rather
than as a series of instructions.

Not only does the invention of the *Perspex* make it theoretically possible
for us to develop robots with minds that learn and develop, it also provides
us with clues to answer the philosophical conundrum of how minds relate to
bodies in living beings.

A conventional computer program comprises of a list of instructions, and if
one of those instructions goes missing or is damaged then the whole program
crashes. However, with the *Perspex*, the program works rather like a neural
network and is able to bridge gaps and continue running and developing even
when it sustains considerable damage.

"All computer programs can be written in terms of the *Perspex*.
Essentially, it is a new, geometrical computer instruction that looks like
an artificial neuron. Any existing computer program can be compiled into a
network of these neurons.

"The *Perspex* links the geometry of the physical world with the structure
of computations so, to the extent that mind is computable, the Perspex
provides one solution to the centuries-old problem of how mind arises in
physical bodies.

"*Perspexes* exist in a mathematical space called 'perspex space'. *Perspex
space* can describe the ordinary space we live in, along with all of the
physical bodies that make up our space, and all of the minds that arise from
physical bodies. It provides a model that is accurate enough for a robot to
use to describe its own mind and body.

"*Perspex* programs show the very human trait of periodic recovery and
relapse when they are damaged; perhaps for the same reason. The
*Perspex*tells us how mind can relate to body so the geometrical
properties that
govern a *Perspex* program's injury and recovery also apply to us because
our bodies exist in space. We share a common geometry, and this has
implications for our minds and bodies. For the first time, the
*Perspex*makes computer programs prone to injury, illness, and
recovery like a human
being. And a computer program that continues developing despite damaged,
erroneous, and lost data means that, in the future, we could have computers
that are able to develop their own minds despite, or because of, the rigours
of living in the world.

"The *Perspex* allows global reasoning to be attained with just one initial
instruction. So a *Perspex* program can operate on the whole of a problem
before it attends to the myriad of detail. This is very much like human
strategic thinking. It arises from the geometry of the *Perspex*, not from
the specific detail of the program that is being run. This tells us that
strategic thinking can be a property of the way our brains are constructed
and is not necessarily to do with the substance of what we happen to be
thinking about. It might be that some people are better at strategic
thinking than others because of the geometry of their brains.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://assamnet.org/pipermail/assam_assamnet.org/attachments/20071018/6fe3adf2/attachment.html