Darwin & Wallace (Evolution)

by David Turell , Saturday, October 03, 2015, 15:36 (3337 days ago) @ dhw


> dhw: Your first point is the same as mine: speciation advances by innovation, not by adaptation. We do not know how or why this happened, since there was no need for ANY innovation. If you are now dropping your oft repeated argument that “no need” bolsters your case for humans as God's purpose, I shall be delighted. If you think “no need” bolsters the case for guidance, we are back to the question of what sort of guidance.-I really have no way of knowing what sort of guidance, nor do I care. Since there are huge gaps in the fossil record and I believe in theistic evolution, God may well have produced each jump in speciation.-> DAVID: I don't have to decide, and guidance will do, because I don't see how species arrive for no good reason of need.
> 
> dhw: Quite right, you don't have to. Badly phrased. You can remain agnostic on the question. However, once we accept that there is a drive to complexity or “improvement”, we look at the Turellian theory that humans are God's purpose for this drive, and we ask why God would need to personally design the weaverbird's nest or - if we want to focus on species - the long extinct Jabberwockus Carrolliensis in order to produce or feed humans. And, with my theist hat on, I can't help feeling it doesn't add up. -Your analytical brain won't let loose. We humans are here against all odds. Life is a wildly convoluted bush of lifestyles. So? We ARE HERE. That fact is not all explained by Darwin. I see purpose. You see confusion. And when you approach God and ignore purpose, your 'theistic brain' gets all muddled, in my view. That is your problem when you try to be theistic. We do not know if God's logic is 'our' logic. Try looking for purpose.