seanpitnos...@naturalselection.0catch.com (Sean Pitman) wrote in message <news:80d0c26f.0403100815.4c47509b@posting.google.com>...
> drear...@hotmail.com (Von Smith) wrote in message <news:8d74ec45.0403071648.3273a8d5@posting.google.com>...

> > > For example, if I walk by a house in the morning and find a window
> > > broken I can rationally assume either a mindless or mindful cause for
> > > that broken window as both processes could give rise to such a
> > > phenomenon.  However, if I were to walk by this same house in the
> > > evening and find that this window had been fixed, could I rationally
> > > assume anything other than a mindful cause?

> > I don't know.  If I cut myself and it heals, could I rationally assume
> > anything other than a mindful cause?  

> The reason why your skin heals when you cut yourself is not because
> the molecules in your skin have some inherent individual capacity to
> organize themselves in such a way.  They are only able to work to heal
> your skin because of the existence of the pre-established order of the
> incredibly complex information system that directs the processes of
> the skin to include its self-healing properties.  If you don't believe
> me, try cutting a dead body and see what happens.  The cut doesn't
> heal itself.

> Consider the window example again for illustration.  What if I set up
> a very complex mechanical system that would sense when a window in a
> house was broken and set about making a new window and would put it
> into place when it finished making this window.  Now, is the fixing of
> the window in this case a "mindless" process?  You may argue that it
> is, but ultimately you know that without higher informational input,
> the window, by itself, does not have enough informational complexity
> to fix itself.  It must rely on a much higher order of pre-established
> informational complexity, in whatever form, to be fixed.

> So, in seeing a window or a cut on your arm become "fixed" it is no
> problem to know that a higher system of informational complexity was
> driving such a phenomenon.

> > If I shake up oil and vineager,
> > and then come back later to find it re-separated, could I rationally
> > assume anything other than a mindful cause?  

> The separation of oil and vinegar does not require the input of
> outside information because the required information needed to give
> rise to this phenomenon is contained within each of the individual oil
> and vinegar molecules themselves.  However, if you were to find drops
> of oil and vinegar arranged in a very symmetrical pattern around your
> plate, you could adequately assume design because you know that such a
> pattern is not inherent to either oil or vinegar, but would require
> some sort of outside informational input.