Dawkins

How do we respond to Dawkin's view of people as simply bits and bytes - mathematical combinations? I'm hoping that some of you mathematicians will have answers that can suit the inquiring 10 year old so that as a thinking 17 year old he can develop a more sophisticated response. Steve C: Well, a few thoughts to begin with, that are only thoughts with no particular reference. I suspect that Dawkins use of "bits and bytes" is a use of simple alliterration to be clever rather than giving a picture of the human body as a mathematical model. But on the other side of the coin for Dawkins, we are all but chance, an interesting term if interpreted mathematically. Mathematical models are built so as to both represent as acuurately as possible what is, based on what was, and also to predict what will come. The human body, while it can be described generically in biological terms, is incredibly characterised by unique features that are peculiar to each and every single human being. That is, there are features that identify us a single person out of the billions that have and will be the population of the earth, eg, our dna, finger prints, gait, handwriting, voice, etc.These cannot be represented by a model, tha is, by generic "bits and pieces" Standing at the urinal today I marvelled at the way that we have been designed to take in goodness and naturally excrete waste .. wow! Holding the hand of love of my life, I am blown away by the mixture of emotion and feeling ... try describing that in terms of bits and pieces, especially if they happento have come together by chance. There are an extraordinary number of aspects of creation, created by a Creator that defy the claims of God's creativeness as being just hohum!

Whilst we can say that life is full of mathematics, I don't think we can say that mathematics is full of life. Steve: To be discussed after reports!!!!!!