Different in degree or kind: animal minds (Introduction)

by David Turell , Sunday, January 03, 2016, 15:43 (3247 days ago) @ dhw

David You want a logical God, but He may not fit your requirements. Is the universe logical, if we assume its enormous expanse is just for life on Earth?[/i]
> 
> dhw: No, it is not logical. That is another very good reason for doubting your assumption that the universe was specially created for our sake. I do not “want” a logical God. I want a logical explanation for life and evolution, whether it entails a God or no God.-But you are asking for human logic. Must that be the same as God's logic?-> dhw: Your logic in putting the theistic case for design against atheistic chance has always seemed to me impeccable. However, when it comes to reading your God's mind in relation to the history of the universe and evolution, suddenly logic doesn't matter.-I start with what we see and work backwards. There is no other way to approach an understanding of the history. Humans are here, but obviously not required. They are obviously a special advance in complexity (different in kind, not degree).
> 
> DAVID: If we are the only life, then God exists, is the viewpoint I follow.
> 
> dhw: Strangely enough, my theistic self could easily accommodate extraterrestrial life within the picture. Why would God confine his experiments to a single planet? -Why not?-> dhw: I still don't understand how the specially, divinely designed weaverbird's nest (plus the parasitic wasp and jellyfish and the ”hundreds of other examples”) provides “consumable energy requirement plant or animal” for humans.-I admit I don't know either, but my method of analysis, described above, doesn't require it.-> dhw: However, you have agreed that this whole higgledy-piggledy history could logically be explained by your God having engineered a free-for-all and hit on the idea of humans later on, or having wanted humans right from the start and just messing things up until he finally hit the jackpot.-I've agreed this theory is possible, not probable, since we have no way of knowing, looking back at what resulted-> dhw: The trouble is, we must only use logic if we are discussing the odds for and against chance, or if it coincides with ID and anthropocentrism!-Again, whose logic? Is God's logic the same as ours? My logical view is certainly not yours.