Based on the provided sources, Arieh Ben-Naim offers a harsh and specific critique of P.W. Atkins, primarily targeting Atkins’ rejection of the information-theoretic definition of entropy and his reliance on the metaphors of “disorder” and “chaos.”
Ben-Naim’s arguments against Atkins can be categorized into three main points:
1. The “Disservice” of Rejecting Information Theory
Ben-Naim criticizes Atkins for explicitly rejecting the connection between entropy and information theory. Atkins famously argued in the preface to The Second Law (1984) that he deliberately omitted the relation to information theory to avoid the “muddleheadedness” of making entropy appear subjective or “all in the mind.”
• The Critique: Ben-Naim calls this rejection “ironic”[1]. He argues that by rejecting the precise mathematical definition of entropy as Shannon’s measure of missing information, Atkins was forced to rely on terms like “disorder” and “disorganization.” Ben-Naim asserts that these vague concepts are actually more subjective and “in the mind” than the information-theoretic definition Atkins sought to avoid[1][2].
• The Consequence: Ben-Naim views Atkins’ stance as a “corruption” of the concept, preventing a clear understanding of entropy and perpetuating unnecessary mystery around the Second Law[4][5].
2. The Failure to Explain Life via Entropy
Ben-Naim aggressively targets Atkins’ claims that the Second Law can account for the emergence of life. Atkins stated in his books (e.g., The Second Law and Four Laws That Drive the Universe) that the Second Law explains the “emergence of the intricately ordered forms characteristic of life” and how “chaos can run apparently against Nature” to achieve life[6][7].
• Empty Promises: Ben-Naim dismisses these statements as “unfulfilled promises,” “empty,” and “pure nonsense”[6]. He argues that Atkins fails to provide any actual mechanism or proof for how the Second Law accounts for biological complexity.
• Misapplication: Ben-Naim maintains that entropy is not even definable for a living system (because the states of a living organism cannot be counted or specified), rendering Atkins’ assertions about entropy driving life “meaningless”[9].
3. The “Liberation of the Human Spirit”
Ben-Naim mocks Atkins’ philosophical elevation of the Second Law. Atkins wrote that “no other scientific law has contributed more to the liberation of the human spirit than the Second Law of thermodynamics”[12][13].
• Ambiguity: Ben-Naim states he “failed to understand what the Second Law has got to do with ‘liberating the human spirit’“[14].
• Obscurantism: He criticizes Atkins for using language that propagates mystery rather than clarity. For instance, Atkins’ reference to “infinitely incomprehensible entropy” is cited by Ben-Naim as a prime example of writing that discourages understanding and mystifies a concept that should be treated as common sense[13][14].
In summary, Ben-Naim critiques Atkins for discarding a precise scientific tool (information theory) in favor of vague metaphors (“disorder”) that ultimately fail to explain the phenomena (life) Atkins claims to address.
References
[1] Ben-Naim - Entropy and Information Theory - Uses and Misuses.pdf [2] [Book] Ben-Naim - A Farewell To Entropy Statistical Thermodynamics Based On Information.pdf [4] [Book] Ben-Naim - A Farewell To Entropy Statistical Thermodynamics Based On Information.pdf [5] [Book] Ben-Naim - A Farewell To Entropy Statistical Thermodynamics Based On Information.pdf [6] Ben Naim - Can entropy apply to living systems.pdf [7] Ben-Naim - Entropy and Information Theory - Uses and Misuses.pdf [9] Ben Naim - Can entropy apply to living systems.pdf [12] Ben-Naim - Entropy and Information Theory - Uses and Misuses.pdf [13] [Book] Ben-Naim - Entropy demystified the second law of thermodynamics reduced to plain common sense.pdf [14] [Book] Ben-Naim - Entropy demystified the second law of thermodynamics reduced to plain common sense.pdf