Dembski states that “a nondeterministic universe can be informationally porous and thus open to action by a deity able to impart information without imparting material energy. Quantum mechanics, when interpreted as a fundamentally probabilistic theory, offers such a picture of the universe, allowing God free play at the quantum level. . . . In a world of irreducibly chance or random events, as some interpretations of quantum theory allow, God can channel such events toward preordained ends.”

We have seen in my books and in selected blogs that synaptic transmission is stochastic, or random. It is a nondeterminism that allows the intent of a mind, including the Mind of God, to influence the direction and intensity of spike trains of action potentials through synchronous synaptic networks to bring about specific actions. Quantum mechanics provides the “trigger” mechanism for such action by the process of quantum tunneling, and it is wave forms with frequency, amplitude and shape that serve as the nonmaterial energy for specified information transmission, interacting with the material electrochemical energies along dendrites and axons in the nervous system.

I cite Dembski:

“More generally, in any inquiry, scientific or otherwise, if we are trying to understand an information transfer, the first thing we witness is an information relationship, and only then are we in a position to uncover how energy might have given rise to that relationship. Some form of energy must presumably be involved - we are supposing that information transfers require energy transfers (though not necessarily material energy transfers). Moreover, if the energy can’t be material, then it must be nonmaterial.”

We have read posts that deal with intelligence, information and matter, but what about energy? Dembski addresses the topic of energy in the following excerpts:

“Information changes dynamically, with information passing in, through, and out of matter. . . . Anything that exhibits information needed at some point to be imparted with information. What causes information to undergo such dynamic transformation? The usual answer to this question is stated in one word: energy. . . . energy is logically downstream from information in the sense that energy is always inferred from information, but not vice versa. . . . Energy . . . seems unavoidable in discussions about the dynamics of information. . . . When information happens - and it happens all the time - what causes it to happen? . . . energy is as good an answer as exists. This answer makes energy the causal glue that connects diverse items of information in an informational universe.”

Dembski specifically mentions an immaterial energy in this context, and I have addressed such energy in blog posts that discuss the role of wave forms in the transmission of linguistic neural codes through synaptic networks by the process of quantum tunneling.

Dr. Dembski challenges the long-held primacy of matter for science, with the claim that reduction to materialistic explanations have a hold on primacy. I am posting a quotation from Dembski:

“. . . information is, in the end, always the product of a creative intelligence. This would make intelligence rather than information the most basic metaphysical entity [the Mind of God], placing all-sufficiency with intelligence rather than information. Indeed, as a theist, I regard an intelligent being, God, as the prime reality. The issue here, however, is not the primacy of intelligence or teleology for metaphysics. The issue, rather, is the primacy of information for science. I am arguing that information should properly be regarded as the prime entity and object of study in science, displacing matter from its current position of eminence.”

“The expression ‘effected spoken word’ . . . means this: an agent, in forming an intention [a thought of a cognitive mind], accomplishes it by first articulating the intention as a word [for example, the linguistic neural code I have discussed in my books and in many blogs], then transmitting that word through a speech act [for example, the transmission of neural codes through synchronous synaptic networks], and finally ensuring that this spoken word achieves its desired effect [the action end point that completes the definition of information, as discussed by Werner Gitt]. . . . When the agent is God intent on creating a world, creation likewise becomes an effected spoken word. Compare Isaiah 55:11, God speaking, ‘So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.’” (William A. Dembski)

Dembski asks a challenging and important question, “. . . what is more real, material objects or the information characteristic of material objects? I would say the information. . . . We live, move and have our being inside a matrix of information. We have no way of getting outside that matrix. Moreover, according to the Judeo-Christian account of creation, there may be no outside. If creation is, as this religious tradition teaches, an effected word spoken by God, then creation itself is a primal informational act. Moreover, the outworking of this creation in all its details will then be a series of echoes stemming from that primal act. Given such an account of creation, the search for a substratum of reality more basic than information would be futile.”

Dembski’s comments speak to the reality that the ultimate source of information is a mind, in this case the Mind of God. In the next blog post I will include Dembski’s comments in a footnote that expand on this point.

Dembski discusses the patterns of information that are problems for materialism:

“The problem for materialism and empiricism in reconstituting the world, whether in terms of elemental matter or elemental sensory experiences respectively, is ultimately informational. When we do science, we don’t encounter matter in its raw state nor do we encounter sensory experiences in their raw state. Rather, we encounter certain patterns to the exclusion of others [Dembski’s “small probabilities” selected by an intelligent mind]. In other words, we encounter information. The material and sensory features associated with these patterns are secondary. Indeed, those very features are themselves patterned and thus informational. The patterns, or equivalently the types of information conveyed, are primary.”

Dembski cites cybernetics founder, Norbert Weiner, who “thought that information could not be subsumed under matter: ‘Information is information, not matter or energy. No materialism which does not admit this can survive at the present day.’”

Dembski addresses God’s creations as teleological:

“. . . from the vantage of Christian theism, I . . . see nature as a created order endowed by its creator with certain powers, all of which may be regarded as teleological since they were intended by God. But Christianity goes further, holding to a supernatural deity, with God acting in ways that transcend nature’s inherent powers. . . . Christian theism therefore regards nature as inherently incomplete, finding its completion in God. . . . Christian theism is compatible with God delegating to nature many of its powers (cf. the medieval distinction between primary and secondary causes, secondary causes operating under their own power, instituted by the primary cause, God).”

Dembski presents an interesting and informative discussion of intelligence as it relates to nature:

“In everyday experience, we distinguish between two sources of information: intelligence and nature. . . . an intelligence, to advance a purpose, may identify one possibility to the exclusion of others and thereby produce information. Alternatively, nature, as a system of causes and effects, may bring about some event to the exclusion of others, and thereby produce information. . . . a human intelligence, to advance a purpose, performs a conceptual act, identifying one possibility to the exclusion of others. Such an act requires thought and consciousness, and yet in humans makes use of neurophysiology [encoded spike trains of action potentials that transmit information through synaptic networks, as discussed in my books and specific blog posts], which in turn is part of nature. Human intelligence may therefore be regarded as natural even if it is not purely material. . . . According to information theorist Douglas Robertson, the defining characteristic of intelligent agents . . . is their ability to create and communicate information. That’s what intelligences do for a living. . . . it follows that if nature is itself the act of a creative intelligence, then nature is a form of information and nature’s operations may themselves be regarded as intelligent and teleological. Nature’s intelligence would in that case be a derived intelligence. . . . Because materialism gives primacy to matter, it downgrades the role of intelligence in nature, conceiving of nature in purely material terms, thus making intelligence a byproduct of material nature rather than its source and purpose. Materialism sees matter as fundamentally non-intelligent, and it thus needs to constitute intelligence out of matter.”