Некто Critical Rationalist утверждает (среди прочего):
In the case of knowledge, а physical medium is well adapted to serve the causal role that results in it being retained.
Надо сказать, что материалисты, когда задаются достаточно систематически "проклятыми вопросами" происхождения, вынуждены изворачиваться. Вот и данный критический рационалист несёт околесицу. У него знание существует объективно вне зависимости от познающего, не требуя существования последнего.
Upright Biped задаёт ему следующие вопросы:
What is physically required of DNA in order to be well adapted? How does that cause it to be retained?
на которые сам же потом отвечает. Как всегда, UB комментирует так, что хочется это сохранять себе на память.
The two-word answer to the first question is “rate independence”.
That’s the primary physical property of DNA that makes it suitable as a very particular type of medium. The rate-independent sequence in DNA is a necessary condition of the system, and can be exploited to establish a reading-frame code – giving the system the informational capacity it needs to describe the set of interpretive constraints required for semantic closure to occur. Rate-independence is also the property that enables transcribability of its high content, another requirement of semantic closure.
The two-word answer to the second question is “It doesn’t”.
The rate independent properties of DNA neither determines the sequence of nucleotides that describe the constraints (obviously), nor does it determine which amino acids will appear in those constraints. Thus, rate-independence does not “serve the causal role” in retaining the information in DNA. That role is played by organization, not by the physical properties the the medium.
Here is what you posted:
In short, for a physical system to be an information medium two tasks must be possible. It must be capable of being set to a number of distinct attributes (at least two).
This is incorrect. In fact, the vast majority of media in nature are not rate-independent. The author clearly does not understand the material, and fails to grasp the important physical distinctions.
From previous writing:
There is a fundamental principle within physics sometimes referred to as the minimum total potential energy principle. This principle is related to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and simply states that any physical object (regardless of its size or composition, as big as a planet or as small as a molecule) will distort and twist, and naturally orient itself to seek its lowest potential energy state. To the average reader, this principle might seem difficult to understand, but it’s a principle we each see in effect around us all the time. For instance, we see it in the way a tree branch covered in snow will hang down low as it counteracts the additional weight of the snow, or the way that the propeller on a toy plane is spun by a tightly wound rubber band until the rubber band becomes loose again. In short, this principle can be thought of in general terms as the natural tendency of any object to seek a balance of all the various forces acting upon it at any given time.
Since all representations are physical objects, they are all subject to this fundamental principle. There are representations that function directly as a result of the medium physically assuming its lowest potential energy state. This includes the vast majority of all informational mediums. A pheromone, for instance, is a perfect example. A pheromone is a chemical compound that serves as a representation by assuming its lowest potential energy state. In other words, any given pheromone is a combination of a certain number of specific atoms that (when bound together as a compound) assumes a certain physical structure according to its nature – and it is that specific three-dimensional structure that the system recognizes and responds to.
However, there is another class of representation whose individuating characteristics (i.e. the properties that make a representation individually recognizable within its system) are not established by the medium assuming its lowest potential energy state. This is a very unique class of representation, and is considerably rarer among all forms of information-bearing mediums. As a simple example, the word “apple” written in ink on a piece of paper is a material structure not unlike the pheromone. In general terms, the atoms that make up the ink will interact with the atoms that make up the paper, and together they will assume their combined lowest potential energy state (i.e. a piece of paper stained with ink markings). However, what is actually recognized within the system is solely the arrangement of the ink markings (the shape and sequence of the letters) and that arrangement has nothing whatsoever to do with the lowest potential energy state of ink and paper. This is to say that the arrangement of the letters could be changed to any number of other arrangements, signifying any number of other messages, with every variation being completely undetermined by the lowest potential energy state of ink and paper. Unlike the pheromone, the sequence pattern of a spatially-oriented representation literally does not have a “physical nature” to assume. Instead, the pattern is imposed on the medium and is therefore independent of the minimum total potential energy state of the medium.
These are (among the many) critical details of the system that have already been described by physics. The conceptions you’re promoting are at odds with these details. Have you abandoned your claim that Darwinian evolution is the source of the translation apparatus?