The biochemistry of cell communication (Introduction)

by dhw, Monday, September 05, 2016, 12:59 (3000 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: My concept of cell intelligence does not preclude the automatic activities that are essential to the functioning of communities once an organ exists. Intelligence only comes into active play when there is a problem to be solved or, going one step further in my evolutionary hypothesis, when new conditions permit innovation. 
DAVID: And I pointed out that Shapiro demonstrates they can edit their DNA to accomplish changes. Their ability may well come from a God-given mechanism. - It's good to hear that you also think cells/cell communities can do their own “editing”, as opposed to relying on your God to do it for them. I have always agreed that this ability may have been God-given. - xxxxxx - dhw: You said some of the Tasmanian devils may have had partial immunity to start with, so what was the point of that if partial immunity is of no use? ... Once again: you have excluded divine intervention, so did your God preprogramme the solution, and a few individuals only managed to switch on the right programme at the last minute? Or did they work it out for themselves?
David: Not every attribute organisms carry are useful. They become useful when needed. This is what new adaptations of parts is all about. Seen in evolution regularly. The devils may have done it by copulating survivors producing more immune progeny, seen all the time in biology. - This would mean the Tasmanian devils already “carried” their immunity to the new form of cancer, but the immunity “attribute” only became “useful” when the new form of cancer arrived. I am sceptical that the zillions of adaptations (not to mention innovations and natural wonders) extant and extinct were/are already present in every organism and were/are only “useful when needed”, as that would mean that barring divine dabbling - assuming you still believe in common descent - they were all preprogrammed in the very first cells. Earlier you talked of me stretching my concept of autonomous, intelligent, self-changing cell communities “beyond all credulity”. Hmmm… - xxxxxx - dhw; ….Figuring something out suggests intelligence to me.
DAVID: I was referring to the researchers finding out the automatic response in cells, not the cells themselves. - Ah, my apologies - a misunderstanding. Nevertheless, I see no sign in the article itself that the researchers regard the responses as automatic. Whereas: “I've found detect, recognize, determine, sensing, interpret….all of which seem to suggest some sort of…how should I put it…intelligence?” - xxxxxx - DAVID: Ants are whole beings with brains. Cells are not. 
dhw; Some single cells are whole beings, though the analogy here is with cell communities. And as a dualist, you keep telling us that intelligence is not the product of the brain.
DAVID: You are confused about my beliefs. Intelligence is the product of the brain plasticity. Consciousness is not. The brain is required to receive it. - I certainly am confused. I can't see how natural (as opposed to artificial) intelligence at any level can exist without consciousness (not to be confused with human self-awareness). And if you believe in an afterlife, I really don't see how you can be your brainless self with your consciousness but without your intelligence. How about your memories, emotions, beliefs, ideas? Will these join your intelligence back in the rotting brain, while your consciousness lives on without them?