drzach wrote:

A better analogy for the kind of information conferred by the DNA transcription/translation process is more akin to the kind of process illustrated when someone walks across a beach. Footprints are laid down in the sand according to the physical properties of the original foot, and then someone can come along later with latex or plaster and make an approximation of that original foot.

I'm just trying to understand this, Zach...

So, the footprint would be like the DNA itself... and it can replicate itself by making copies (the plaster part of the analogy).  But, how do we get from the footprint to the ability for that footprint to direct the creation of a person?

I agree with you about the "language" analogy not being good, though.  Also, another word that needs to be better understood in this context is "information".  We tend to think of "information" as "meaningful data" -- I'm not sure that applies in the same way to DNA, though.

I'm very interested in trying to understand this better.  I'm not sure if there are good answers out there, or if scientists are still trying to understand it?

drzach wrote:

The foot would be the DNA. Footprints are the mRNA, and the plaster casts are the eventual proteins.

Oh, okay.  That makes sense, now.

So, how do we get from the foot to the whole body?  DNA doesn't just replicate itself, it also provides the direction for the creation of much larger & complicated bodies.

Is it right to call this a "blueprint" -- something that contains "information" on how to build complex bodies?  Or does that analogy not work either?

drzach wrote:

Instead of a blueprint, it's better to think of DNA as a template. When you get into using the blueprint analogy, you're also infusing it with teleological intent. A blueprint exists specifically for the purpose of building something- it's inherently teleological. But a template can be used to replicate itself... or not. It all depends on the conditions. A template could be just as happy just sitting there and never getting copied.

I'm playing Devil's Advocate...  or God's Advocate... and really trying to understand this.

DNA is not living, right?  It doesn't just copy itself, it also guides the development of much larger & more complex structures.  A template can be used to make copies of itself, but not to build larger & more complex structures... can they?

This all goes back to "information".  When you say that the blueprint analogy implies "teleological intent", do you mean that any set of instructions is inherently teleological?  If so, then it would seem to me that, indeed, DNA is inherently teleological.  I'm not understanding how you get from DNA to the creation of a body without that DNA being "a set of instructions" -- which would be synonymous to me with "blueprint".

That visual imagery helps, but even the way that video is made imbues teleological implications. Everything moves slowly and deliberately towards each other, like they're being steered by some intelligent force. In reality, those molecules are bouncing around all over the place and it's only when they come in close contact with each other that the complex actions are catalyzed. It's really just a complex chemical reaction.

No, you are correct. Look up Vitamin C and the defective Gulo gene. A fascinating bit of evidence connecting us to our chimp cousins.