# Code as an Analogy of DNA?

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634>\
**Category:** Side Conversation\
**Tags:** Science\
**Created:** [December 21, 2018, 8:23pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634 "2018-12-21T20:23:03Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 15

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DaleCutler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/dalecutler/32/746_2.png) [@DaleCutler](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/DaleCutler)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:18am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/282 "2018-12-30T02:18:27Z")

</div>

We could go back and enumerate, but that would be a positive exercise in negativity for me.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:20am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/283 "2018-12-30T02:20:08Z")

</div>

> [@DaleCutler](#):
>
> _You_ wouldn’t, consciously, anyway. But we are talking hypotheticals.

True. Part of scientific training is learning to be ruthlessly self-opposed to your own arguments. Everything is torn down so something might be built.

Now at my stage I do not unwisely risk my reputation on anything but an argument I can win, because I know from the get go I can. I abandoned a 100 arguments every one I take forward. The clarity and quality that comes from that ruthless selectiveness is why my opinion counts and why I have a scientific reputation to speak of.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Upright\_BiPed](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/upright_biped/32/2666_2.png) [@Upright\_BiPed](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Upright_BiPed)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:21am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/284 "2018-12-30T02:21:31Z")

</div>

Dale, questioning your intelligence and understanding is part of the strategic territory. You’ll notice that no one has yet given you probative physical evidence that the genetic code is not a code. Suggesting that you don’t know what your talking about is a placemat for that missing evidence – as is suggesting that using the word “code” is a poor analogy which clearly breaks down at some point, then declining to say where that point is. The issue is that when that “point” is put on the table, it is quickly shown that the conclusion is merely (and must be) assumed to be true.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DaleCutler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/dalecutler/32/746_2.png) [@DaleCutler](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/DaleCutler)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:21am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/285 "2018-12-30T02:21:42Z")

</div>

I’m known where I need to be known.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:22am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/286 "2018-12-30T02:22:00Z")

</div>

> [@Upright\_BiPed](#):
>
> You’ll notice that no one has yet given you probative physical evidence that the genetic code is not a code.

He said he wasn’t interested, that is why I didn’t give it to him.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:23am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/287 "2018-12-30T02:23:31Z")

</div>

It is not about being known it is about making good arguments and abandoning the bad.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DaleCutler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/dalecutler/32/746_2.png) [@DaleCutler](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/DaleCutler)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:25am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/288 "2018-12-30T02:25:31Z")

</div>

If you were referring to me, I actually did say to @Dan_Eastwood that we could go ahead and tear away at the factory analogy, and ‘code’ would be part of that, so have at it.

But if our ET visitor elected to call the information on DNA analogous to code, well… 🙂

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rumraket](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/rumraket/32/9328_2.png) [@Rumraket](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Rumraket)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:25am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/289 "2018-12-30T02:25:33Z")

</div>

> [@Upright\_BiPed](#):
>
> Dale, questioning your intelligence and understanding is part of the strategic territory. You’ll notice that no one has yet given you probative physical evidence that the genetic code is not a code.

You, too, can call the genetic code a code just as much as you want. Just understand that the label you use to describe the object is not any sort of indication how it came about. If you are trying to argue the genetic code was designed, you still have all your work ahead of you and no amount on insisting the genetic code is a code is capable of getting you to that conclusion.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Timothy\_Horton](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/timothy_horton/32/9410_2.png) [@Timothy\_Horton](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Timothy_Horton)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:27am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/290 "2018-12-30T02:27:46Z")

</div>

> [@Upright\_BiPed](#):
>
> You’ll notice that no one has yet given you probative physical evidence that the genetic code is not a code.

We’ve agreed it is a code, a physical process with a mapping of inputs to outputs. It’s just not an intelligently designed code which uses arbitrary symbols as abstractions to pass messages.

Some day ID-Creationists will stop the dishonest equivocation between the different definitions of “code”. But not today it seems.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DaleCutler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/dalecutler/32/746_2.png) [@DaleCutler](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/DaleCutler)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:30am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/291 "2018-12-30T02:30:53Z")

</div>

Likewise, insisting it was not designed is not capable of getting you to the conclusion that it was not – just objecting to the analogy doesn’t get you there either.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DaleCutler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/dalecutler/32/746_2.png) [@DaleCutler](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/DaleCutler)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:33am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/292 "2018-12-30T02:33:00Z")

</div>

We’ve agreed it’s a code. Nice to know.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Timothy\_Horton](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/timothy_horton/32/9410_2.png) [@Timothy\_Horton](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Timothy_Horton)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:34am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/293 "2018-12-30T02:34:01Z")

</div>

> [@DaleCutler](#):
>
> Likewise, insisting it was not designed is capable of getting you to the conclusion that it was not – just objecting to the analogy doesn’t get you there either.

Science has reached the conclusion DNA was not designed because 1) there is zero positive evidence of any conscious design and 2) there is lots of evidence it evolved naturally.

All scientific conclusions are of course tentative and subject to change pending the introduction of new evidence. If and when you finally get your first piece of positive evidence for “design”, let us know.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DaleCutler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/dalecutler/32/746_2.png) [@DaleCutler](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/DaleCutler)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:35am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/294 "2018-12-30T02:35:51Z")

</div>

> [@Timothy\_Horton](#):
>
> there is lots of evidence it evolved naturally

Okay then. 🙂 Similar to abiogenesis and eukaryotes.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rumraket](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/rumraket/32/9328_2.png) [@Rumraket](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Rumraket)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:37am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/295 "2018-12-30T02:37:50Z")

</div>

> [@DaleCutler](#):
>
> Likewise, insisting it was not designed is capable of getting you to the conclusion that it was not – just objecting to the analogy doesn’t get you there either.

I agree. So where do we go from here?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rumraket](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/rumraket/32/9328_2.png) [@Rumraket](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Rumraket)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:38am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/296 "2018-12-30T02:38:29Z")

</div>

> [@DaleCutler](#):
>
> Okay then. 🙂 Similar to abiogenesis and eukaryotes.

Yes, there’s evidence those evolved naturally too. Correct.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DaleCutler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/dalecutler/32/746_2.png) [@DaleCutler](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/DaleCutler)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:42am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/297 "2018-12-30T02:42:38Z")

</div>

Since I was recently informed of my naivety and that yes, we do all emphatically agree that DNA is a code (@swamidass? 🙂), we could proceed to tear away at the cell ↔ factory analogy and see where it fails.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rumraket](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/rumraket/32/9328_2.png) [@Rumraket](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Rumraket)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:46am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/298 "2018-12-30T02:46:05Z")

</div>

I don’t think the labelling enterprise is conducive to anything. I think you can also call a cell a factory too if that makes you happy. That also does nothing to establish the ultimate origin of cells. For that we have to look at evidence, not labels.

I’m just going to call the genetic code, _the genetic code_, and I’m going to call cells, _cells_. And if you want to call the genetic code a code too, I’m fine with that, and if you want to call cells factories, have at it.

Meanwhile, I will be looking at some evidence rather than obsess about the labels. How’s that?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:46am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/299 "2018-12-30T02:46:41Z")

</div>

@DaleCutler DNA is not a code. “Code” is an imperfect analogy for the genetic code. It can be a valid and invalid analogy based on the argument. You appear to be using the analogy in an invalid way.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![DaleCutler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/dalecutler/32/746_2.png) [@DaleCutler](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/DaleCutler)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:47am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/300 "2018-12-30T02:47:26Z")

</div>

> [@Rumraket](#):
>
> Yes, there’s evidence those evolved naturally too. Correct.

Strong evidence that abiogenesis ‘evolved’. You have not conversed with Dr. Tour lately.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Timothy\_Horton](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/timothy_horton/32/9410_2.png) [@Timothy\_Horton](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Timothy_Horton)\
**Post date:** [December 30, 2018, 2:47am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634/301 "2018-12-30T02:47:47Z")

</div>

> [@swamidass](#):
>
> DNA is not a code. “Code” is an imperfect analogy for the genetic code.

As with everything else it is or isn’t depending on which definition one is using.

[Previous page](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634.md?page=14)

[Next page](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/code-as-an-analogy-of-dna/3634.md?page=16)