OK, here are a couple different possible definitions of complexity:<quoted text>

You seem to me to be content to dodge the issue and not provide a definition, because you cannot explain the evolution of complexity without intelligence.

1. The complexity of a system is the minimal size of a Turing machine necessary to describe the system. This is a standard definition in algorithm analysis.

2. A system is complex if there is exponential divergence from initial conditions: in other words, if the system is prepared several times with small differences in initial conditions, the system will change in ways that differ exponentially.This, by the way, is a standard definition for dynamical systems.

More to the point, your definition of complexity is 'a system with intricate, interacting parts'. That is clearly NOT the definition of 'complexity'. It *may* turn into a definition of a 'complex system', but that is a slightly different thing.If my definition is "ill-forumulated" and you suggest that there is no definition... then am I to presume that you don't really believe that complexity exists?

Using either of the two standard definitions above (which give different conceptualizations of complexity), there are many systems that form naturally and are complex. Weather is such a system: it has many interacting parts, it has exponential divergence of initial conditions, and it requires a large turing machine to describe. By *any* of the standard definitions (even yours!), it is a complex phenomenon that requires no intelligence to form.There is a fundamental flaw in logic here...

You imply that because I cannot provide a succint definition of complexity that satisfies you, that you can ignore it altogether and assume that no intelligence can create it.

I still await your response concerning an example of a natural, non-intelligent force that has been observed to create complexity.

Once again, the issue of entropy in ice was to show that *order* can spontaneously form without intelligence. That is a different issue than whether *complexity* can form spontaneously. As I have pointed out, you frequently confuse the two concepts... which could realistically be extended to the creation of a genetic code by the simple addition of a vast amount of time and space. The creation of ice, regardless of a decrease in entropy, is not a valid example.

You have claimed that order cannot form without intelligent intervention. You were wrong. next, you claimed that complexity cannot form without intelligent intervention. By the usual definitions, you are wrong again. If you want to use a different notion of complexity, please give a precise definition of the term and explain, for example, why weather does not form a complex system by your definition.

168,761 - 168,780of 180,369 Comments Last updatedJul 31, 2017