12-28-05 EGO theory
I'd like to suggest an alternate theory to Intelligent Design, and call it Effectively Growing Organization, or "EGO" for short. EGO, as opposed to ID, doesn't attempt to explain how life started or why different species came to exist. Instead, it suggests that the basic principle behind life is organization.
The central idea behind EGO is that the physical universe is considered to be composed of space, time, and all the forms of matter that exist, but within this framework life exists in opposition to the physical universe's natural tendency to "run downhill". It's very easy to see this. Where there's no life, things are chaotic, random, or running downhill, so to speak, and obeying the laws of motion. Life interacts in some way, and introduces change, modification, order, or organization of some kind.
For instance, a beaver builds a dam. As long as the beaver continues to use the dam and keep it repaired, it keeps on imposing some level of organization. Once the beaver goes away, the dam then deteriorates over time.
EGO is a very simple theory. It says that life is the ONE THING within this universe that doesn't behave the same as everything else. This is certainly an observable phenomenon. It suggests that calling life a RESULT of the physical universe may not be the way that could lead to an understanding of what life actually is.
Now, the reader may well be wondering if I'm joking around, because I did come up with the name for this theory only because Intelligent Design is referred to lately by its initials which, coincidentally, spell the word Id, which, of course, is the most primitive part of the psychoanalytical tripartite structure of consciousness. Therefore, in keeping with that wordplay, I wanted to come up with something that EGO would stand for...
The fact is, this theory is something I've been improvising for the past ten minutes as I write this. But the basic idea behind it is something I've been thinking about for quite some time. The only reason I've been thinking about it is because of Quantum theory.
http://www.vision.net.au/~apaterson/science/observer_effect.htm
The above link is probably sufficient to explain why Quantum theory would lead me into this whole thing, whether you're a nobel prize-winning physicist or completely unaware of what this branch of science might be about.
The "observer effect" leads one irretrievably toward the question, "What, exactly, is the observer?"
Well, one attribute of "the observer" would be in line with what the EGO theory holds concerning life, that it runs counter to the rest of the physical universe and all of its phenomena.
In Quantum theory, nothing really exists until it's observed. This is quite fantastic! It means that nothing is real, or exists at all until it's observed. Does this mean that anything and everything in the physical universe that WE ON EARTH haven't yet observed only exists because it was previously observed by OTHER life forms somewhere?
Who knows? It's all very incredible to consider that THIS is where science is bringing us lately.
But it IS where science is headed.
So, it might be interesting to see if the EGO theory can be of any use to us in our quest for understanding.
As a general idea, the following differentiations might have some usefulness...
Life organizes while the universe dis-organizes.
Life evolves while the universe de-volves.
Life pushes "up-hill" while the universe pushes "down-hill".
Life initiates actions while the universe is only comprised of reactions.
As an alternate to Intelligent Design theory, EGO theory doesn't really enter into the arena as a contender against the theory of Evolution. Instead, it attempts to ignore the theory of Evolution entirely, while remaining a viable alternative to Intelligent Design. Why? Because EGO theory is based in the same utter lack of scientific grounding, that's why! Also, it addresses the main area of why Intelligent Design arose into the roiling sea of politics, in the first place... the questions of LIFE, itself. When the theory of Evolution is perceived by religious people to assert that life began "by chance", they get upset. And well they should be upset, since asserting that life began on this planet "by chance" at this stage of the game is really just a pipedream of humanists.
Nobody knows how life began on this planet, and until we find that out, asserting any ideas about it in publicly funded classrooms seems a bit premature to me.
I tend to doubt that life began on Earth "by chance", partly because it's become such a dogmatic assumption in various circles. Circles that I certainly feel very comfortable in, otherwise.
But I digress...
In attempting to render down to basics, another idea behind EGO theory is that it would not only apply to life as we think we know it, but also to life in forms that we might not even be able to imagine. For instance, the quality of organizing and growing can be seen in crystals of all kinds. The idea of a life form based in some element other than carbon has been dealt with in science fiction, but not yet observed in the real world. For instance, in the film, "The Andromeda Strain" the alien life form had a crystalline structure. Should we ever find the effects of life that "go against the grain" of otherwise natural processes out there on the other planets, their moons, or elsewhere, it would make more sense to me to be deciding whether it's actually evidence of life on terms other than the dogmatically restrictive "by chance" paradigm.
In other words, EGO theory undercuts to a simpler level of consideration about life. I mean, what's the point of assuming HOW life began when we're failing to differentiate what life IS from what life ISN'T? When we've been failing utterly to notice that life is profoundly and fundamentally opposed to everything else in the universe, as regards its observable behavior, what's the point of continuing to assert that it's a product of something that goes entirely in the opposite direction?
I think it would be more rational to doubt that assertion, at this point.
Such a doubt would arise directly out of repeatable experiments that verify the "observer effect" and anything that this demonstrative, objective scientific evidence might lead us to.
The central idea behind EGO is that the physical universe is considered to be composed of space, time, and all the forms of matter that exist, but within this framework life exists in opposition to the physical universe's natural tendency to "run downhill". It's very easy to see this. Where there's no life, things are chaotic, random, or running downhill, so to speak, and obeying the laws of motion. Life interacts in some way, and introduces change, modification, order, or organization of some kind.
For instance, a beaver builds a dam. As long as the beaver continues to use the dam and keep it repaired, it keeps on imposing some level of organization. Once the beaver goes away, the dam then deteriorates over time.
EGO is a very simple theory. It says that life is the ONE THING within this universe that doesn't behave the same as everything else. This is certainly an observable phenomenon. It suggests that calling life a RESULT of the physical universe may not be the way that could lead to an understanding of what life actually is.
Now, the reader may well be wondering if I'm joking around, because I did come up with the name for this theory only because Intelligent Design is referred to lately by its initials which, coincidentally, spell the word Id, which, of course, is the most primitive part of the psychoanalytical tripartite structure of consciousness. Therefore, in keeping with that wordplay, I wanted to come up with something that EGO would stand for...
The fact is, this theory is something I've been improvising for the past ten minutes as I write this. But the basic idea behind it is something I've been thinking about for quite some time. The only reason I've been thinking about it is because of Quantum theory.
http://www.vision.net.au/~apaterson/science/observer_effect.htm
The above link is probably sufficient to explain why Quantum theory would lead me into this whole thing, whether you're a nobel prize-winning physicist or completely unaware of what this branch of science might be about.
The "observer effect" leads one irretrievably toward the question, "What, exactly, is the observer?"
Well, one attribute of "the observer" would be in line with what the EGO theory holds concerning life, that it runs counter to the rest of the physical universe and all of its phenomena.
In Quantum theory, nothing really exists until it's observed. This is quite fantastic! It means that nothing is real, or exists at all until it's observed. Does this mean that anything and everything in the physical universe that WE ON EARTH haven't yet observed only exists because it was previously observed by OTHER life forms somewhere?
Who knows? It's all very incredible to consider that THIS is where science is bringing us lately.
But it IS where science is headed.
So, it might be interesting to see if the EGO theory can be of any use to us in our quest for understanding.
As a general idea, the following differentiations might have some usefulness...
Life organizes while the universe dis-organizes.
Life evolves while the universe de-volves.
Life pushes "up-hill" while the universe pushes "down-hill".
Life initiates actions while the universe is only comprised of reactions.
As an alternate to Intelligent Design theory, EGO theory doesn't really enter into the arena as a contender against the theory of Evolution. Instead, it attempts to ignore the theory of Evolution entirely, while remaining a viable alternative to Intelligent Design. Why? Because EGO theory is based in the same utter lack of scientific grounding, that's why! Also, it addresses the main area of why Intelligent Design arose into the roiling sea of politics, in the first place... the questions of LIFE, itself. When the theory of Evolution is perceived by religious people to assert that life began "by chance", they get upset. And well they should be upset, since asserting that life began on this planet "by chance" at this stage of the game is really just a pipedream of humanists.
Nobody knows how life began on this planet, and until we find that out, asserting any ideas about it in publicly funded classrooms seems a bit premature to me.
I tend to doubt that life began on Earth "by chance", partly because it's become such a dogmatic assumption in various circles. Circles that I certainly feel very comfortable in, otherwise.
But I digress...
In attempting to render down to basics, another idea behind EGO theory is that it would not only apply to life as we think we know it, but also to life in forms that we might not even be able to imagine. For instance, the quality of organizing and growing can be seen in crystals of all kinds. The idea of a life form based in some element other than carbon has been dealt with in science fiction, but not yet observed in the real world. For instance, in the film, "The Andromeda Strain" the alien life form had a crystalline structure. Should we ever find the effects of life that "go against the grain" of otherwise natural processes out there on the other planets, their moons, or elsewhere, it would make more sense to me to be deciding whether it's actually evidence of life on terms other than the dogmatically restrictive "by chance" paradigm.
In other words, EGO theory undercuts to a simpler level of consideration about life. I mean, what's the point of assuming HOW life began when we're failing to differentiate what life IS from what life ISN'T? When we've been failing utterly to notice that life is profoundly and fundamentally opposed to everything else in the universe, as regards its observable behavior, what's the point of continuing to assert that it's a product of something that goes entirely in the opposite direction?
I think it would be more rational to doubt that assertion, at this point.
Such a doubt would arise directly out of repeatable experiments that verify the "observer effect" and anything that this demonstrative, objective scientific evidence might lead us to.
posted by Jeff Barnard at 6:05 PM
<< Home