Defining sentient cells: Cell receptors (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, April 03, 2018, 11:38 (2214 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: You have brought the discussion back to where God might have dabbled. The inventive behavior may be God's.

dhw: Yes of course, your God – apparently in order to fulfil his prime purpose of producing the sapiens brain – might have given private lessons to weaverbirds, beavers, chameleons, ants, termites and every other naturally wonderful organism. And even now he might personally be teaching bacteria to solve new problems as and when they arise. And indeed he might even be personally pulling the David Turell and dhw strings, as we kid ourselves that we are autonomous thinkers and doers. On the other hand, our behaviour and their behaviour “may be” the result of your God giving us and them the means to do our/their own thinking and doing. So do please tell us the secret method you have discovered for distinguishing between automatic behaviour and autonomous behaviour.

DAVID: Because all cellular reactions to stimuli are shown by scientific research to be a series of molecular reactions. Molecules reacting to molecules don't mentate.

As a dualist you believe that certain cellular reactions in humans are caused by the activities of an immaterial self which gives instructions to the material self. (Lots of reactions are automatic, but we judge intelligence by those that are not.) Science has never shown that there is an immaterial self giving instructions to molecules. However, what scientific research has shown is that even micro-organisms can solve problems, communicate, cooperate, take decisions. And all these are characteristics of intelligence (though of course on nothing like the scale of human intelligence and self-awareness). You say there is no way we can tell the difference between automaticity and autonomy, so once again, how can you know that cells/cell communities do not mentate? And please don’t change cells to molecules. That is like saying your little fingernail doesn’t mentate.

DAVID (under “cellular intelligence”): This study shows the shape of the organic molecule carries information in its shape by a chemist who creates decoy shapes.
DAVID’s comment: It requires the exact shapes of each type of molecule to transmit meaningful actions. How can one doubt God's creation when this is understood? We are learning God's tricks, Look at the website to see the illustration of the decoy and what it copies.

I’m sorry you put this under the heading of “cellular intelligence”. Just to clarify: as above, I am not questioning the obvious fact that molecules contain information and their actions are automatic. Your comment, which concerns the complexity of design, is fair enough, but I’d just like to point out that neither it nor the article can be used to negate the possibility of cellular intelligence.