But a lot of things process information, and most of them are neither intelligent nor a product of any intelligent being. If a cold raindrop falls into a thermal spring, then the raindrop-spring system is going to process some information - more specifically, the spring is going to transfer some heat to the raindrop, thus "cutting" some information from the spring and "pasting" it to the raindrop.
Uhh ok I guess.. That seems a stretch though, seems what you describe is simply the mixing or scrambling of information rather than processing it in any way.
Wiki [Processing typically describes the act of taking something through an established and usually routine set of procedures to convert it from one form to another, as a manufacturing procedure, such as processing milk into cheese. Processing can also refer to administrative procedure such as processing paperwork to grant a mortgage loan.
To me, Information processing can only be done by an intelligence and fit's more into that wiki description. So intelligence and information processing are mutually exclusive yes, but that doesn't mean information processing can only be done by intelligence, just that intelligence is currently the only know source. There lies my escape hatch from a circular argument.
As Elvish Pillager said,
Quote
Defining information, hmm? It's probably harder to define the act of "processing" it. ".
I'll admit, that is a tough one.
« Last Edit: December 20, 2007, 11:39:06 pm by RTyp06 »
Defintions are all fine and good, but they are not necessarily correct. Prove to me that you need to exist in order to be percieved.
But there's not universal "correctness" for definitions, they're only needed for successful communication. And I think that most people would agree with the notion that "to do is to exist". It's like a trivial special case of existence. Another less trivial one is "to be perceived is to exist".