• A Seagull
    66
    DNA has no meaning of itself, only people with a model of the world can ascribe meaning to it when they incorporate the concept of DNA into their model of the world.
  • Chris Hughes
    117
    The meaning of DNA is life, you could say. The question, I'd say, is: is there cosmic meaning behind the inexplicable appearance of DNA some four billion years ago?
  • A Seagull
    66
    Lots of things are inexplicable, perhaps even most things. Though I would say that the appearance of DNA a few billion years ago is a lot less inexplicable than the appearance of time, space, forces and matter some 14 billion years ago.

    The fun part is trying to understand such things and try to work out the nuts and bolts of how things could have occurred.
  • Chris Hughes
    117
    It's understandable that we don't understand the origin of the universe, less so with DNA.
  • A Seagull
    66

    Understanding is a bottomless pit. When people say they understand something what they mean is that they have made progress in finding a better theory to fit the data. But there is most likely a better theory lurking underneath.
  • Chris Hughes
    117
    Sure. But we "understand" evolution since the appearance of DNA.
  • A Seagull
    66

    If we accept, as I think we do, that the Earth was created some 4.5 billion years ago when there was no life and that now there is a abundance and variation of life then there must be some process by which that life appeared. Evolution is the obvious process. Most of the variation in life forms were created in the past 500 million years which still allows for 3 billion years (allowing a billion years for the Earth to cool and the oceans to appear.) for something like the DNA molecule to evolve. Doesn't seem too hard for me to believe.
  • Chris Hughes
    117
    Then how come there's no agreed explanation for the "evolution" of DNA?
  • A Seagull
    66

    I don't really know. Perhaps it is a problem awaiting your brilliance and insight to solve, or perhaps there is insufficient data..or perhaps undertaking experiments in the laboratory that take billions of years to conduct is just too hard..
    All I know is that one needs to start with some form of replicating molecule..but what that would look like I don't know.. and yeah it is surprising that no one has managed to identify a simple replicating organic molecule.. or maybe they have and I just don't know about it..
  • Chris Hughes
    117


    If I may quote from my OP:
    Wikipedia says that DNA is a molecule that carries the genetic instructions used in the growth, development, functioning and reproduction of all known living organisms. Most DNA molecules consist of two strands coiled around each other to form a double helix. Both strands store the same biological information, which is replicated when the two strands separate.

    Does that sound like something that came about by chemicals randomly bumping into each other?

    Perhaps DNA came into existence because the universe (or multiverse if you like) has meaning, perhaps deriving from universal consciousness. Again, I’d suggest that meaning is never the product of random processes.
12Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.