Purpose and design (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Tuesday, April 25, 2017, 19:30 (33 days ago) @ dhw

Tony: Some things are done strictly for the benefit of the creature in question. However, just because the bird's nest is not strictly for humanity's sake, the bird itself DOES fill a vital role in keeping the earth alive, and thus, giving the bird a means to stay alive does fall into the larger category of benefiting humanity specifically and all life in general.
DAVID: Thank you. dhw for some reason cannot see this.
DAVID: What I have left above is the part of Tony's statement that I was applauding.

dhw: All forms of life fulfil a role in “keeping the Earth alive”. I don’t think anyone on this planet would disagree. That has nothing whatsoever to do with your anthropocentric interpretation of evolution.

I was applauding: " does fall into the larger category of benefiting humanity specifically and all life in general." Nothing more. It does not support my anthropocentric thesis by itself. See my entry on fine tuning: Tuesday, April 25, 2017, 14:59

dhw: I know you are desperate for support from Tony, but:Humans, as the prime goal of all creation, or even of evolution, is truly just silliness, even according to science which claims everything is still evolving” (Balance Maintained, 1 April under “God and evolution”). Thank you, Tony. David for some reason cannot see this.

DAVID: We are both trying to interpret Tony. I think He would accept the appearance of humans as a major purpose of God.

dhw: If God exists, I would also agree that the appearance of humans is A major purpose. But I do not agree that it is THE one and only purpose and everything else, including the weaverbird’s nest, the jumping spider and the parasitic wasp, was personally designed by your God and was/is related to that one and only purpose.

I don't expect you to agree. Everything we see is designed to produce life which resulted in humans. The result speaks for itself.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum