Beyond Irreducible Complexity
The Amazing Dependent Interconnectedness of Biological Systems
Science Shepherd author Dr. Scott Hardin was invited to speak at a recent Midwest Creation Fellowship meeting. His topic was "interconnected dependent systems". A special thanks to MCF for making this video available.
In 1996, Michael Behe's irreducible complexity added an entirely new level to consider when assessing the obvious design in biological systems, which itself rides on the back of more than 200 years of studying the elements of design and using them to show there must be a designer (a la William Paley's Natural Theology). I read Dr. Behe's book around 2000, and I (like many others) came to the logical conclusion that design elements are design elements; it makes no difference if the system is biological or mechanical. Systems that demonstrate elements of design are designed systems; therefore they have a designer. This obvious (and objective) conclusion was reinforced when I attended a, at the time, somewhat hush-hush symposium about biological information, during which some of the most brilliant minds in academia and the private sector presented their research about biological information contained in DNA as related to the impossibility of it arising by naturalistic mechanisms (as evolution dictates it must). A fascinating observation from that entire conference is that most of the scientists presenting data showing biological information can't arise naturally were NOT creationists. Many of them believed that life on earth started from aliens bringing the biological information here for evolution "to do its thing" (of course, there is ultimately no question of who the originator of biological information is), while others simply hadn't sought to find that answer.
By definition, irreducibly complex systems cease functioning when any one of the multiple, well-matched parts are removed. For example, biological motors, like ATP synthase and bacterial flagella, and certain chemical pathways, like the clotting system, are irreducibly complex ones. Remove any one component and they cease functioning--they don't malfunction, they don't function. But as I have spent many years studying biological systems and the genetic information that supports them, it's clear that, while irreducible complexity is wholly sufficient in-so-far as it explains those systems that are irreducibly complex, MOST biological systems are actually not irreducibly complex. Instead, the maximized function of one system relies on the maximized function of other systems to an overall maximized goal. Think about how sleep, movement, thinking/planning, blood glucose control, hormonal regulation, circulation, etc. etc., are accomplished. They all require multiple subsystems whose functions are connected to achieve the goal of the larger system of which they are a part. The hallmark of such systems is that one (or more) of the subsystems can malfunction, or even cease function, and the goal of the subsystems' cooperative function is still (kind of) achieved. I call such systems that achieve goals like sleep, wakefulness, walking or talking "interconnected dependent systems", and in this talk I explain that more, as well as show that the existence of such systems--like irreducible complexity--is clear evidence of design.
Free Video Series
To learn more from Dr. Hardin, enroll in our free 10-part series Scripture and Science: Perfectly Compatible. Analyze a wide-range of topics, including the age of the earth, discernment, logic and more, to learn that scripture and science are always compatible.
Until next time!
Science Shepherd
