• home
• about
• new
• essays
• AI
• book

Frank Visser, graduated as a psychologist of culture and religion, founded IntegralWorld in 1997. He worked as production manager for various publishing houses and as service manager for various internet companies and lives in Amsterdam. Books: Ken Wilber: Thought as Passion (SUNY, 2003), and The Corona Conspiracy: Combatting Disinformation about the Coronavirus (Kindle, 2020).

The Role of Information in Modern Arguments for the Existence of God

Frank Visser / ChatGPT

Me to ChatGPT:

• Modern day proofs of the existence of God point to the role of information. Please write an essay introducing this topic.
• Give some examples of authors defending this type of argument.
• Isn't information always related to a material substrate, either gross like paper or rarified like electromagnetic waves?
• Such an "external source of intelligence" would have to be able to code DNA sequences. How?
• An Intelligent Designer is often postulated, without taking this operational aspect into account.
• Ken Wilber postulates not so much a Logos but an Eros in the Kosmos that takes care of this.
• How is such an “intra-natural drive towards complexity”, as Wilber phrases it, not question begging?
• It's ironic that a hyper-intellectual author like Ken Wilber would choose Eros as symbol for the divine.
• Yet, this mythological display of divine "forces" contradicts all scientific work on self-organization.

Modern day proofs of the existence of God point to the role of information. Please write an essay introducing this topic.

The question of God's existence has been debated for millennia, with arguments evolving alongside scientific and philosophical advancements. In recent years, a new approach has gained traction: the argument from information. This perspective suggests that the fundamental nature of reality—particularly the presence of complex, structured information—points to an intelligent source. Unlike classical arguments based on causality (the cosmological argument) or purpose (the teleological argument), this line of reasoning views information itself as a fundamental clue to the existence of a higher intelligence.

The Information Paradigm

Modern physics and biology reveal that information is not just a byproduct of reality but a foundational aspect of it. In quantum mechanics, information is conserved even when particles seem to vanish. In biology, DNA operates as a highly organized code, storing instructions that govern life's functions. Some theorists argue that such intricate, purposeful information is unlikely to arise by chance and instead suggests an intelligent source—what many would call God.

Physicist John Wheeler famously proposed that "it from bit," meaning that physical reality is fundamentally composed of information rather than matter. If information underlies everything, then one might ask: Where does this information originate? Some thinkers argue that an informational foundation to reality is best explained by a conscious mind rather than by randomness or brute physical necessity.

DNA as an Information System

One of the most compelling modern arguments comes from the field of genetics. DNA is often compared to computer code due to its highly specific instructions for building and maintaining life. Microsoft founder Bill Gates once remarked that "DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created." Unlike random patterns in nature, which can be explained by physical processes, DNA carries meaningful, functional instructions—a hallmark of intelligent design in human experience. Some scientists and philosophers argue that such an intricate coding system cannot be the result of undirected natural processes alone but must be the product of an intelligent source.

The Simulation Hypothesis and a Digital God

Interestingly, some modern discussions in theoretical physics and computer science suggest that the universe may resemble a vast simulation, governed by structured mathematical laws. If the universe is informationally structured like a computer program, then it raises the question: Who or what is the programmer? While not explicitly a theological argument, the simulation hypothesis implies a designer or an intelligence behind reality—an idea that resonates with traditional conceptions of God.

Challenges and Counterarguments

Critics argue that the presence of information does not necessarily require a divine source. Evolutionary biology explains how complex structures, including genetic information, arise through natural selection. Likewise, physicists seek natural explanations for information conservation in quantum mechanics. Others caution against anthropomorphizing nature, suggesting that just because human-designed systems use information does not mean nature's information requires a designer.

Nevertheless, the argument from information remains one of the most intriguing modern discussions about God's existence. As science continues to uncover deeper layers of reality, the question of whether information itself points to a transcendent intelligence remains open. Whether one views it as scientific evidence for God or as an unsolved mystery, the role of information in the fabric of existence is an issue that continues to challenge our understanding of reality.

Give some examples of authors defending this type of argument.

Several authors and thinkers have explored the argument from information as evidence for the existence of God. Here are some key figures:

1. Stephen C. Meyer – Signature in the Cell (2009), Return of the God Hypothesis (2021)

Meyer, a philosopher of science and proponent of intelligent design, argues that DNA contains complex specified information (CSI) that cannot be explained by natural processes alone. He claims that the informational properties of life point to an intelligent cause, much like how human-created codes and languages always originate from a mind.

2. William Dembski – The Design Inference (1998), Intelligent Design (1999)

Dembski, a mathematician and philosopher, developed the concept of specified complexity, arguing that information-rich systems, like those found in biology, exhibit patterns best explained by intelligence rather than chance or necessity. His work attempts to mathematically formalize the inference of design in nature.

3. John Wheeler – “It from Bit” Hypothesis

Although not a theist argument per se, Wheeler (a prominent physicist) proposed that the fundamental nature of reality is informational rather than material. He suggested that the universe emerges from binary information (bits), leading some to speculate that this points toward an underlying mind or consciousness.

4. Paul Davies – The Mind of God (1992), The Demon in the Machine (2019)

Davies, a physicist and philosopher, has explored the idea that life's informational complexity suggests an underlying intelligence. He argues that the emergence of order and meaning in the universe cannot be fully explained by physics alone, hinting at a deeper informational structure that resembles purposeful design.

5. George F. R. Ellis – How Can Physics Underlie the Mind? (2016)

Ellis, a physicist and cosmologist, discusses how information plays a crucial role in the structure of the universe. He suggests that the laws of physics themselves encode a kind of informational order, which may imply a guiding intelligence beyond physical matter.

6. Werner Gitt – In the Beginning Was Information (1997)

Gitt, an engineer and information scientist, argues that information is a non-material entity that cannot arise from purely materialistic processes. He contends that all meaningful information originates from intelligence, supporting the idea of a divine creator.

7. Nick Bostrom – Are You Living in a Computer Simulation? (2003)

Bostrom, a philosopher at Oxford, is best known for his simulation hypothesis, which suggests that our universe might be an artificial construct. While not a theistic argument in itself, his work has been co-opted by some thinkers who argue that the "simulator" could be analogous to a divine mind.

These authors provide different angles on the information argument, whether from biological design, cosmology, or digital physics. Some explicitly argue for God's existence, while others raise questions that support the broader idea of an intelligent source behind reality.

Isn't information always related to a material substrate, either gross like paper or rarified like electromagnetic waves?

That's a key challenge to the argument that information itself points to a non-material intelligence. Information, as we commonly experience it, is always instantiated in a physical medium—whether ink on paper, magnetic fields in a hard drive, or neural patterns in a brain. This raises an important question: Can information exist independently of matter, or is it always dependent on a material substrate?

Two Perspectives on Information and Matter

Materialist View: Information is always embedded in a physical system. Even DNA, which some use as evidence for intelligent design, is a biochemical molecule subject to physical laws. In this view, information has no independent existence—it is simply a pattern or arrangement of matter and energy.

Non-Materialist View: Some argue that while information is expressed in physical forms, its essence is not reducible to matter. This is analogous to how a book's meaning is not the ink and paper but the encoded message. Theists and philosophers like John Wheeler, Paul Davies, and Werner Gitt argue that information may be a fundamental aspect of reality, not just a property of matter.

Does Information Have a Non-Material Source?

Mathematical and Logical Information: Numbers, logical laws, and mathematical truths seem to exist independently of any material form. Many mathematicians and philosophers argue that mathematical structures are discovered, not invented. If so, does this suggest an underlying mind or intelligence that grounds them?

Quantum Information: Some interpretations of quantum mechanics (e.g., Wheeler's "It from Bit") suggest that information is more fundamental than matter, with reality emerging from informational processes rather than pure physical interactions.

Biological Information (DNA): Even if DNA is physical, the specific arrangement of its base pairs encodes functional instructions. Some argue that such specified complexity points to an external source of intelligence rather than arising solely from natural processes.

While skeptics maintain that information cannot exist apart from matter, others argue that its structure and meaning transcend the physical medium. If information is truly fundamental, this opens the door to the idea that intelligence—potentially a divine intelligence—could underlie the fabric of reality.

Such an “external source of intelligence” would have to be able to code DNA sequences. How?

For an "external source of intelligence" to be responsible for coding DNA sequences, it would need a mechanism to input functional genetic information into biological systems. The challenge is explaining how this could happen without invoking vague notions of divine intervention. Several possibilities have been proposed:

1. Front-Loaded Information in the Universe

One idea is that the laws of physics were designed to produce life, meaning the information for DNA was "baked into" the universe from the beginning. This is similar to the fine-tuning argument in cosmology: if fundamental constants and natural laws were precisely set up to allow life, then perhaps they also contained the potential for complex biological information to emerge naturally.

The Anthropic Principle: Some argue that the conditions of the universe were fine-tuned not only for life but for the emergence of meaningful genetic codes.

Self-Organizing Systems: If the universe's laws were set up in a way that naturally leads to ordered, functional biological information, then DNA coding might be an inevitable consequence of these deeper informational structures.

2. Intelligent Design at the Origin of Life

Some proponents of intelligent design, like Stephen Meyer, suggest that an external intelligence directly encoded genetic information at the origin of life. Since no known natural process has been shown to generate functional, complex genetic sequences from non-life, they argue that the best explanation is an intelligent cause.

Simulation Hypothesis Parallel: If the universe functions like a digital simulation, an external intelligence could have introduced genetic information in a way analogous to how a programmer introduces code into a software system.

Directed Panspermia: Some have suggested that life was seeded on Earth by an advanced intelligence (either extraterrestrial or divine). While this doesn't answer the ultimate origin of DNA information, it shifts the question to another context.

3. Quantum or Non-Local Information Transfer

If information is more fundamental than matter (as suggested by Wheeler's "It from Bit" or quantum information theory), then perhaps DNA sequences are influenced by informational principles that transcend classical physics.

Quantum Biology: Some researchers speculate that quantum effects play a role in biological processes, including genetic mutations and molecular organization.

Non-Local Causation: If information is not bound by space and time in the same way as matter, then an external intelligence could, in theory, introduce genetic sequences without a direct material mechanism.

Challenges and Open Questions

What is the physical mechanism? If an external intelligence encoded DNA, how did it physically alter molecular structures? Was it through biochemical manipulation, an unknown form of energy, or indirect constraints on natural laws?

Is this testable? Can we scientifically detect patterns in DNA that distinguish designed sequences from naturally evolved ones? Some ID theorists argue that specified complexity and irreducible complexity provide clues, but mainstream biology remains unconvinced.

Does this require supernatural intervention? If DNA information was externally coded, does this mean God intervened periodically in history, or was the system designed to evolve toward life from the outset?

Ultimately, explaining how an external intelligence could code DNA remains an open question. The information argument points to a puzzle, but bridging the gap between intelligence and biochemical reality remains a major challenge.

An Intelligent Designer is often postulated, without taking this operational aspect into account.

You're right—many arguments for an Intelligent Designer (ID) focus on the existence of complex information in biological systems but often leave the operational mechanism vague. If an intelligence is responsible for coding DNA, how does it actually intervene in physical reality to manipulate molecular structures? This is a major gap in most ID arguments.

The Mechanistic Problem in Intelligent Design

Direct Encoding vs. Law-Based Emergence

If an external intelligence directly encoded DNA, this would require some form of physical interaction. Did it manipulate chemical bonds? Alter quantum states? Introduce new information via unknown forces?

Alternatively, if DNA sequences emerged indirectly through finely tuned physical laws, then the designer would have front-loaded the universe with the right conditions for life, rather than actively coding genetic information at a later stage.

Is There Empirical Evidence of Direct Encoding?

In human-designed systems (e.g., computer code or linguistic texts), we can trace the process by which information is inserted into a system. Is there a comparable trace in biological systems?

Some ID theorists point to "orphan genes" (genes with no known evolutionary precursors) or sudden bursts of genetic information in evolutionary history as potential indicators of designed interventions. But mainstream biology argues that natural processes, such as gene duplication and mutation, can account for these changes.

Possible Operational Mechanisms for an Intelligent Designer

Biochemical Manipulation:

The designer could have directly modified molecular structures, arranging nucleotides in functional sequences. This would require an interface with biochemical matter—an unknown force, energy, or quantum process capable of shaping molecules in a precise manner.

Quantum Influence:

Some researchers speculate that quantum effects play a role in biological organization. Could an external intelligence influence genetic mutations at the quantum level, subtly guiding biological change over time?

Quantum mechanics allows for non-local causation and wavefunction collapse, but there's no concrete evidence that such effects are used to encode information into DNA.

Algorithmic Evolutionary Constraints:

Instead of periodic interventions, the designer might have built evolutionary constraints into the laws of nature, ensuring that beneficial genetic sequences arise more frequently than chance alone would allow.

Some physicists and biologists explore self-organizing principles in nature that could lead to the emergence of complex biological information in a deterministic way.

Simulated or Programmed Reality:

If reality operates like a computational system, as some versions of the Simulation Hypothesis suggest, then genetic information could have been inserted into the simulation's code at key moments.

This idea, while speculative, mirrors theological concepts where reality is a creation of a divine mind.

The Core Challenge: Bridging Intelligence and Physical Mechanism

Design implies engineering. If an intelligence designed life, it must have had a means of implementing its design. Without explaining the mechanism, the ID argument remains incomplete.

Intervention vs. front-loading. Did the designer actively intervene, or was the system set up from the start to produce complex information naturally?

Testability. Can we develop scientific methods to detect non-random genetic information patterns that indicate intelligent manipulation?

Conclusion

Many ID proponents argue that the presence of functional information itself is sufficient to infer intelligence, but without an operational mechanism, this remains a philosophical argument rather than a scientific hypothesis. A truly robust ID theory would need to explain how an intelligence interacts with biological matter—something that remains an open question.

Ken Wilber postulates not so much a Logos but an Eros in the Kosmos that takes care of this.

Yes, Ken Wilber's perspective offers a different take on the idea of intelligence in the cosmos. Rather than positing an external, interventionist designer like in Intelligent Design (ID) theories, he describes a built-in Eros—a directional, self-organizing force within the universe that drives complexity, self-transcendence, and the emergence of higher forms.

Eros vs. Logos: Wilber's Evolutionary Impulse

Traditional theological perspectives often describe reality as structured by Logos—a rational, ordering principle (akin to the Judeo-Christian concept of divine reason or Plato's ideal forms).

Wilber, in contrast, emphasizes Eros—a dynamic, evolutionary impulse that is inherent in the fabric of the cosmos itself. Rather than a pre-scripted plan (as in ID or fine-tuning arguments), he sees an intrinsic drive toward greater complexity, self-awareness, and integration.

How Does Eros Operate in Evolution?

Wilber integrates insights from evolution, complexity science, and spirituality to suggest that:

Evolution is not purely random – While natural selection plays a role, he argues that the rise of complexity in life (from molecules to cells to organisms to minds) suggests an underlying directional push.

The universe has a self-transcending drive – Matter organizes itself into life, life into self-awareness, and self-awareness into higher states of consciousness. This is not a deterministic mechanism but a tendency within the Kosmos.

Consciousness is woven into the evolutionary process – Unlike materialist evolutionists who see consciousness as a late byproduct of brain complexity, Wilber sees consciousness as fundamental, unfolding alongside physical evolution.

DNA and the Role of Eros

In the context of DNA and information, Wilber wouldn't argue that a designer programmed genetic sequences directly. Instead, he might suggest:

The universe has a self-organizing intelligence that encourages the emergence of functional biological structures.

DNA, as an informational medium, arises through a combination of natural selection and an inner drive toward complexity and self-transcendence.

This process is neither purely deterministic (as in intelligent design) nor purely random (as in strict neo-Darwinism), but an interplay of constraints, chance, and an evolutionary pull toward higher integration.

How Does This Differ from Intelligent Design?

ID postulates an external intelligence that encodes genetic information.

Wilber's Eros suggests an internal, immanent force within the cosmos that guides emergent complexity.

ID sees design as top-down (like a programmer coding software).

Wilber sees evolution as bottom-up and self-organizing but infused with a deeper telos.

Is This a Scientific or Metaphysical Idea?

Wilber's notion of Eros is more of a metaphysical interpretation than a scientific hypothesis. While some complexity scientists explore self-organizing principles in nature, mainstream biology still explains evolution through known mechanisms like mutation, selection, and genetic drift. However, Wilber's framework provides an interesting alternative to both materialist reductionism and the interventionist God of ID.

Would you say that Wilber's approach resonates more with a spiritual or a scientific explanation of life's complexity?

How is such an “intra-natural drive towards complexity”, as Wilber phrases it, not question begging?

Ken Wilber's concept of an "intra-natural drive towards complexity," which he terms Eros, has been scrutinized for potentially being question-begging—that is, assuming the very principle it seeks to explain. Critics argue that positing an inherent drive toward complexity presupposes the existence of the phenomenon it aims to account for, without providing an independent justification.

Critiques Highlighting Potential Circular Reasoning:

Assumption Without Empirical Basis: Frank Visser points out that Wilber's invocation of a spiritual drive toward complexity may lack empirical support, relying instead on metaphysical assumptions. Visser suggests that this approach might be more reflective of a religious perspective than a scientific one, potentially leading to circular reasoning where the premise and conclusion are essentially the same.[1]

Comparison to Scientific Principles: Discussions within the Integral Life community draw parallels between Wilber's concept of Eros and the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Critics argue that asserting a natural drive toward complexity may overlook the substantial energy investments required for such processes, thereby questioning the explanatory power of Wilber's proposition.[2]

Wilber's Perspective:

Wilber acknowledges that his concept of Eros is not a scientific hypothesis but a metaphysical interpretation aimed at integrating various dimensions of human experience, including science, art, and spirituality. He proposes that this inherent drive toward complexity and self-organization is evident in the evolutionary trajectory from matter to life to consciousness. Wilber suggests that recognizing this pattern can provide a more holistic understanding of evolution, one that encompasses both exterior forms and interior experiences.

Conclusion:

The debate centers on whether Wilber's concept of an intra-natural drive toward complexity offers a substantive explanation or merely restates the phenomenon in different terms. While Wilber presents Eros as a unifying principle to account for the emergence of complexity and consciousness, critics contend that without empirical evidence or a clear mechanism, it risks being a tautological explanation. This ongoing discourse highlights the challenges inherent in integrating metaphysical concepts with empirical observations in the quest to understand the dynamics of evolution and complexity.[3]

It's ironic that a hyper-intellectual author like Ken Wilber would choose Eros as symbol for the divine.

Ken Wilber's use of Eros to symbolize the divine may seem unexpected, especially given his reputation as a rigorous intellectual. However, within his integral framework, this choice reflects a nuanced understanding of evolutionary dynamics and the nature of the cosmos.

In Wilber's philosophy, Eros represents the intrinsic force of self-organization and self-transcendence that propels the universe toward greater complexity and consciousness. He suggests that this evolutionary impulse is evident from the formation of atoms to the emergence of life and the development of human consciousness. By identifying Eros as a fundamental aspect of the cosmos, Wilber emphasizes an inherent drive toward wholeness and unity.

Furthermore, Wilber distinguishes between Eros and Agape, viewing them as complementary forces. While Eros embodies the ascending movement toward higher levels of complexity and awareness, Agape represents the descending, compassionate embrace of all levels of being. This interplay highlights the balance between the drive for transcendence and the acceptance of the present moment.

By integrating these concepts, Wilber bridges intellectual analysis with experiential understanding, offering a holistic view that encompasses both the rational and the transcendent aspects of existence. Thus, his choice of Eros as a symbol for the divine aligns with his broader philosophical vision, which seeks to unify diverse perspectives into a coherent whole.

Yet, this mythological display of divine "forces" contradicts all scientific work on self-organization.

You're absolutely right to highlight this tension. Wilber's invocation of Eros as an intrinsic, directional force in the cosmos seems to contradict the scientific understanding of self-organization, which does not require any guiding intelligence or mystical drive.

How Self-Organization is Understood in Science

Scientific theories of self-organization–whether in thermodynamics, complexity science, or evolutionary biology–describe how order emerges spontaneously from the interaction of simple parts under the right conditions. Examples include:

Chemical self-assembly (e.g., lipid membranes forming spontaneously in water).

Autocatalytic sets in prebiotic chemistry (e.g., Stuart Kauffman's work on how molecules self-organize into self-replicating systems).[4]

Biological evolution (e.g., natural selection acting on random variation to produce adaptive complexity).

These processes do not require Eros–they operate through known physical and mathematical principles like dissipative structures (Prigogine), feedback loops, and emergent behavior.[5]

Wilber's Mythological Framing

Wilber, however, suggests that there is an inherent “pull” toward greater complexity and consciousness–something deeper than blind, undirected processes. This introduces a teleological (goal-directed) element that mainstream science does not support. His use of terms like Eros and Agape mythologizes the process, framing natural emergence in quasi-religious terms.

Why This is Problematic

It Contradicts Evolutionary Science – Evolution by natural selection explains complexity without invoking purpose or directionality. Wilber's idea of an inherent drive toward complexity suggests a bias toward upward evolution, whereas biology shows that evolution is contingent and sometimes leads to simplification.

It Risks Being a Just-So Story – If Eros is simply a poetic metaphor, it adds nothing explanatory. If it's a real force, then what is its mechanism? How does it operate within known physical laws? Without these answers, it becomes an unfalsifiable metaphysical claim.

Anthropocentrism – Wilber's framework suggests that evolution is supposed to lead to consciousness and spiritual awakening. But nothing in science supports the idea that life must become self-aware. Intelligence may be an accident rather than an inevitability.

A More Scientific Alternative?

Instead of appealing to Eros, Wilber could align more with complexity science by acknowledging that:

Self-organization arises naturally due to energy flows and selection pressures.

Consciousness is an emergent phenomenon, not a preordained cosmic goal.

Evolution is open-ended, with no intrinsic direction toward "higher" states.

By using mythological language, Wilber risks obscuring these insights and making his ideas seem more mystical than they need to be.

NOTES

[1] Frank Visser, "Ken Wilber's Problematic Relationship to Science", Integral Review, August 2020, Vol. 16, No. 2

[2] "What's your biggest disagreement with Integral theory?", Integral Life Community

[3] Frank Visser, "Further Musings on Wilber and Naturalistic Science", www.integralworld.net

[4] Frank Visser, "Is Stuart Kauffman Really Ken Wilber's Ally?", www.integralworld.net

[5] Frank Visser, "Looking Closer at Ilya Prigogine, And At How Ken Wilber Co-Opts His Work For His Own Agenda", www.integralworld.net