Evolution v Creationism: guided evolution? dhw? (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Tuesday, March 31, 2015, 20:52 (3307 days ago) @ dhw


> dhw: The “current” theory according to Weinberg is that one universe (let alone an endless sequence) can unconsciously provide enough combinations to yield the organized system your Creationist site considers impossible. Now perhaps you can tell us the current theory to explain how energy can be conscious of itself.-DAVID: Simply it is the first cause. It is obviously beyond theory.-> 
> dhw: A conscious first cause is simply a philosophical cop-out. It's not “beyond theory” - it IS a theory, but it's beyond the reach of evidence and reason, and depends as much on faith as the atheist's belief that chance can create life and the evolutionary mechanisms. NB I am not pleading for Weinberg's theory either. I'm an agnostic, in case anyone needs reminding.- Not a cop-out. Perhaps not a thought for you in your incredulous state. I like finding explanations to mysteries, like diagnosing a difficult case with a patient. I believe that that must be a first cause, following the rule that there must be something to start the chain of contingent results. That is not a theory but is a firm logical belief. The reality I see requires planning, because of the enormous complexity. Therefore first cause is capable of planning. Only a mind is capable of planning. Not a theory. a firm belief. For me that explains everything. Not surprising, not outlandish.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum