just a quick re: to Rogering Me's debunk from a few weeks ago. RM, it took me a while to recollect what I was aiming for, and then sieving through that, I think I've cut to the quick: thermodynamism is disobeyed by the existence of life in general.. how can you have more than the sum of the parts? the famous phrase, 'ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny' is a fascinating concept, every stage of development within an organism resembles prior evolutionary stages (even down to 1 1/2 year olds learning to walk, then speaking at 2-ish, kinda still harmonious with epochs in human development, millions of years captured within the space of a few years) but what is the ontology of that ontogeny? and what is the initatiating principle? you can't get energy from nothing, as much as you can't destroy it. but the 'big bang' concept is basically giving creationism a false moustache, in fact, without the mathematical schema in place to describe it, it IS creationism. Therein, how is consciousness initated, each and every single time? Let us say even say consciousness is a metabolic by-product, what then ignited the metabolism? Without recourse to reductionism (eventually, the question must be answered, down to the smallest organelle..), how can consciousness (recognition of itself as life: '"i am", therefore i think') exist according to thermodynamics? there's just no accounting for it.
i had also wondered about entopy as being significant, but i think more as a 'wow, crazy that my body is as attracted to itself as it so as i don't fall apart' kinda way. yay life. thanks for engaging that house of mirrors of a post.