Immunity: detecting dangerous bacteria (Introduction)

by dhw, Tuesday, December 05, 2017, 12:10 (9 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Is there any level of complexity in the biology of life that would cause you to change your opinion?

dhw: The level of complexity is such that I doubt if anything could change my opinion that one can’t dismiss the case for design and hence for a designer. However, the idea that a seemingly infinite universe – filled with galaxies that endlessly come and go for no apparent reason – contains and is contained by a single conscious mind that has no source and of whose actual presence there is no sign, demands such a leap of imagination and blind faith that I doubt if anything could change my opinion that one can’t dismiss the case for chance or for atheistic panpsychism.

DAVID: A fair assessment of your position, but it doesn't explain why we exist.

dhw: All three hypotheses explain why we exist, but you need blind faith to believe in any of them. Or do you mean for what purpose? If God exists, you will have to try to read his mind (which both of us have done). If he does not exist, I’d say our purpose is whatever we make it.

DAVID: Yes, I see purpose in the fact that we exist. WE are a very improbable result of blind chance. As for panpsychism, it is an obvious nod to a universe that appears to have consciousness. And the question raised is where did that come from?

And since you believe in God, you try to read his mind to find his purpose. Camels, whales, ants and eagles are also an improbable result of blind chance. Atheistic panpsychism does indeed assume consciousness in the universe, as a rudimentary bottom-up and evolving form, while the God theory assumes consciousness as a supreme top-down know-it-all-from-the beginning form. The philosophical get-out answer to your question where it came from is “first cause”, which can be applied to either form.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum