Infinite monkey theorem

Use this philosophy forum to discuss and debate general philosophy topics that don't fit into one of the other categories.

This forum is NOT for factual, informational or scientific questions about philosophy (e.g. "What year was Socrates born?"). Those kind of questions can be asked in the off-topic section.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by Terrapin Station »

arjand wrote: January 19th, 2020, 2:57 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: January 19th, 2020, 10:23 amJust out of curiosity, by the way, since on your view, infinity can't have a start, what do you call a series that does have a start but that never ends? For example, positive integers, so we start with 1, 2, 3 . . . and never end? You wouldn't say that it's a finite series, would you? What would you call it?
Mathematical infinite is perceived infinite. The observer gives rise to the potential of infinite. It isn't infinite by itself.
Huh? So which one of those terms is what you'd call what I described?
User avatar
psyreporter
Posts: 1022
Joined: August 15th, 2019, 7:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by psyreporter »

Mathematical or perceived infinite (both the same). The human mind gives rise to infinity. A series isn't infinite by itself.

Infinity as a concept does not have a beginning. It is oneness. There cannot be two infinities.
PsyReporter.com | “If life were to be good as it was, there would be no reason to exist.”
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by Terrapin Station »

arjand wrote: January 19th, 2020, 4:49 pm Mathematical or perceived infinite (both the same). The human mind gives rise to infinity. A series isn't infinite by itself.

Infinity as a concept does not have a beginning. It is oneness. There cannot be two infinities.
I'm not sure I'm following you. You'd call what I described "mathematical infinity" or "perceived infinity," even though infinity as a concept doesn't have a beginning? Are you saying that "mathematical infinity" and " perceived infinity" somehow don't involve the concept of infinity?
User avatar
psyreporter
Posts: 1022
Joined: August 15th, 2019, 7:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by psyreporter »

Yes, at least not by itself. The calculator ads the potential of infinity to mathematics. A mathematical construct is an idea of the human mind.

You can argue that the addition of the potential of infinity by the observer is irrelevant to make mathematics work, however, in the theorem it is used to suggest that there is no need for God or intelligent design. The theorem deviates from the mathematical construct to pose that evolution is driven by random chance.

My argument is therefore that it is required to examine the aspect infinite as how it is used in the theorem, and to determine if it could be used as basis for a claim related to the origin of life (i.e. the perceived intelligent design).
PsyReporter.com | “If life were to be good as it was, there would be no reason to exist.”
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by Terrapin Station »

arjand wrote: January 20th, 2020, 5:34 am Yes, at least not by itself. The calculator ads the potential of infinity to mathematics. A mathematical construct is an idea of the human mind.

You can argue that the addition of the potential of infinity by the observer is irrelevant to make mathematics work, however, in the theorem it is used to suggest that there is no need for God or intelligent design. The theorem deviates from the mathematical construct to pose that evolution is driven by random chance.

My argument is therefore that it is required to examine the aspect infinite as how it is used in the theorem, and to determine if it could be used as basis for a claim related to the origin of life (i.e. the perceived intelligent design).
The more you're typing, the less I know what you're talking about--or the more questions I have.

You don't seem to be really explaining why you'd be saying that "mathematical infinity" or "perceived infinity" don't involve a concept of infinity. It would seem that "infinity" is a misnomer in those terms according to you, then, but a misnomer for what?--we're talking about mathematical or perceived what if we're not talking about infinity? And doesn't it matter how the people using the terms are thinking about them? I'm getting the impression that you might believe that there are somehow "real" or "right" concepts, but that certainly isn't the case.
User avatar
green1
New Trial Member
Posts: 6
Joined: January 12th, 2020, 6:39 am

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by green1 »

Dear all, there is a problem with my account. I cannot post replies. I am trying from another computer. Hope that works.

Thank you all for your comments.

Cheers,

green1
User avatar
psyreporter
Posts: 1022
Joined: August 15th, 2019, 7:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by psyreporter »

What I am arguing is that it is forgotten that the observer is tied to the "what" (infinite) in the context in which it is used. The observer cannot be factored out when "what" is ought to hold any meaning.

A relevant question would be, what is the observer? The observer ads infinity. The series or "perceived infinite" isn't infinity by itself. It is merely a perceived potential that the observer derives from itself.
PsyReporter.com | “If life were to be good as it was, there would be no reason to exist.”
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by Sy Borg »

green1 wrote: January 20th, 2020, 9:22 amDear all, there is a problem with my account. I cannot post replies. I am trying from another computer. Hope that works.

Thank you all for your comments.

Cheers,

green1
Please note that a number of your posts have been disapproved on the basis of:

D.2. All posts need to contribute an on-topic point or on-topic question to the discussion. No single word posts, or meaningless posts. No posts that simply say "yes", "no", "bump", or "I agree".

Other posts have been disapproved because you would make repeat postings two or three times, thinking it had not gone through. You are not the first to do this, and you won't be the last. It's a quirky setup here, but it is at least less infected by mindless fighting than some (which of course is the reason for all the gatekeeping).
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by Terrapin Station »

arjand wrote: January 20th, 2020, 1:43 pm What I am arguing is that it is forgotten that the observer is tied to the "what" (infinite) in the context in which it is used. The observer cannot be factored out when "what" is ought to hold any meaning.
I haven't the faintest idea what that is saying, really. It's sounding increasingly like asylum talk to me.
A relevant question would be, what is the observer? The observer ads infinity. The series or "perceived infinite" isn't infinity by itself. It is merely a perceived potential that the observer derives from itself.
What's "infinity by itself"? Isn't infinity simply a mathematical (or more broadly/roughly a logical) concept?
User avatar
psyreporter
Posts: 1022
Joined: August 15th, 2019, 7:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by psyreporter »

Infinity as a concept doesn't have a beginning. Why would infinite not know an end while it has a beginning? It is nonsensical.

The observer's mind is the beginning of infinity as how it is used in the theorem or in mathematics. Such a concept of infinite isn't a truth by itself and therefore it cannot be used as a basis to pose that evolution is driven by random chance.
PsyReporter.com | “If life were to be good as it was, there would be no reason to exist.”
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by Terrapin Station »

arjand wrote: January 21st, 2020, 9:06 am Infinity as a concept doesn't have a beginning. Why would infinite not know an end while it has a beginning? It is nonsensical.

The observer's mind is the beginning of infinity as how it is used in the theorem or in mathematics. Such a concept of infinite isn't a truth by itself and therefore it cannot be used as a basis to pose that evolution is driven by random chance.
Just re the very last comment there, there isn't anyone who says that "evolution is driven by random chance."

The sciences do not posit that the world works via a series of random events. Whether there is anything at all considered random in the sciences is controversial. But what no one argues is that genetic variations occur via a random process.
User avatar
psyreporter
Posts: 1022
Joined: August 15th, 2019, 7:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by psyreporter »

Terrapin Station wrote: January 21st, 2020, 9:32 amJust re the very last comment there, there isn't anyone who says that "evolution is driven by random chance."
The OT started with the following: The infinite monkey theorem suggests that there is no need for God for an intelligent design. It implies that the theorem is used to argue that evolution is (or could be) driven by random chance.
Terrapin Station wrote: January 21st, 2020, 9:32 amBut what no one argues is that genetic variations occur via a random process.
That assumption may be invalid.
Learning one’s genetic risk changes physiology independent of actual genetic risk

In an interesting twist to the enduring nature vs. nurture debate, a new study from Stanford University finds that just thinking you’re prone to a given outcome may trump both nature and nurture. In fact, simply believing a physical reality about yourself can actually nudge the body in that direction—sometimes even more than actually being prone to the reality.

Source: Nature
Empirical evidence is likely not able to explain evolution, or consciousness. The idea that evolution is driven by random chance is a flawed perspective that originates from a belief in uniformitarianism (dogma), the idea that what science observes remains the same in the future.
PsyReporter.com | “If life were to be good as it was, there would be no reason to exist.”
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by Terrapin Station »

arjand wrote: January 21st, 2020, 2:09 pm
Terrapin Station wrote: January 21st, 2020, 9:32 amJust re the very last comment there, there isn't anyone who says that "evolution is driven by random chance."
The OT started with the following: The infinite monkey theorem suggests that there is no need for God for an intelligent design. It implies that the theorem is used to argue that evolution is (or could be) driven by random chance.
I mean anyone who knows anything at all about science. Anyone who has any credibility academically, etc. Not random Joes on the Internet.
Terrapin Station wrote: January 21st, 2020, 9:32 amBut what no one argues is that genetic variations occur via a random process.
That assumption may be invalid.
It's not an assumption. It's observation of what scientists say. The idea of there even being random quantum phenomena is controversial. If you suggest that there might be any random macro phenomena you're not taken seriously.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by Sy Borg »

Evolution is simple to understand. Consider your own growth from zygote to now. The Earth is developing in the same way. So is everything because nothing stays still, everything changes. It's only logical that the plants and animals that are best at surviving are the ones that we now see. The others just all went away.

Natural selection is not random, which is why it's called "natural selection" and not "random selection". Genetic variations may be random, but the success of an organism depends on how its genetically inherited traits operate in its current environment. If evolution was random, you might find fish and frogs walking on the hot sand of the Atacama desert, or apes and housecats scuttling around the ocean floor.
User avatar
Prof Bulani
Posts: 367
Joined: December 1st, 2019, 3:47 pm

Re: Infinite monkey theorem

Post by Prof Bulani »

arjand wrote: January 21st, 2020, 9:06 am Infinity as a concept doesn't have a beginning. Why would infinite not know an end while it has a beginning? It is nonsensical.

The observer's mind is the beginning of infinity as how it is used in the theorem or in mathematics. Such a concept of infinite isn't a truth by itself and therefore it cannot be used as a basis to pose that evolution is driven by random chance.
That's not how infinity works. The set of natural numbers in maths begins at 1, and is an infinitely large set. Infinite in no way implies having no beginning. And has nothing to do with an observer.

This thread ran away on this infinity tangent and seemed to miss the idea of the op. God is not required for Shakespearean-level creativity to exist. The same can be achieved by random events infinitely occurring. But that's not even the process by which Shakespearean-level creativity actually occurred. We don't have a system in which there are infinite monkeys typing forever. We have a system in which Shakespeare emerged in a finite time. The process is different. Just no God was needed.
"The purpose of life is to survive and replicate" - Erik von Markovik
Post Reply

Return to “General Philosophy”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021