The Difference of Man and the Difference it Makes (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Monday, July 13, 2009, 18:24 (5610 days ago) @ David Turell

Dr. Turell, - Thank you--the point is much clearer. I am finally starting to get that picture from Adler here, he finally--deep into chapter 8--expresses the thought that man being different in kind does not have to destroy phylogenetic continuity, something that when you first told me about the book I thought he had done. - I still have to say however, that even a philosophic position such as yours begs the question on "why is a designer needed?" - My REAL view--I must distinguish this because I play devil's advocate so much that my real positions tend to be obfuscated--is that we bring in outside assumptions (deities) if and only if all possible other alternatives have been completely exhausted. Though I can only guess at your case, I just don't think that complexity + a paradigm shift in humanity are enough to invoke a designer. - You mentioned before that you think life-scientists are more likely to be theists because they are so close to life's complexity. I have a competing theory. They don't spend any time studying chaos or dynamics. I wager that the biggest reason you find fewer theists in the physical sciences is because we (I loosely put myself in that group) are so used to seeing systems that seem incomprehensible become comprehensible with the application of a very simple formula. Chaos theory itself is a study in how seemingly non-deterministic systems actually are deterministic, how very small differences in values in any variable has a drastic effect on the system under study. I've come to that conclusion because that mathematical biology program I told you about--part of my job would be to completely obfuscate all the mathematics, because the majority of biochemists simply have no use or need for any of it in their daily work. - I'm not trying to say that biologists should be staunch materialists, but when you see something that shouldn't be solvable become solvable with a very simple application... so much magic in the world disappears. - Personally, I would *really* like to be able to believe in God/designer. I would like some of the comforts that come with it. I would like to say that "magic" in some form exists somewhere in the universe. I've read a brief summary of Adler's argument in "how to talk about god..." and he makes too many assumptions, the majority of which I find completely unfounded. - Ah well... back to the book. Deep into chapter 8 and Adler removes one of my reservations, admitting that phylogenetic continuity can still be compatible with humans being different in kind... he even addresses some of my previous arguments detailing instincts. Pushing on...