Identity (Identity)

by David Turell , Thursday, September 03, 2009, 02:00 (5559 days ago) @ George Jelliss

If you agree there is no evidence for such an entity, why do you bother giving it credence?-There can never be direct evidence. All of us have to accept that fact. However, I still maintain, if science discovers an increasingly staggering amount of coding complexity (DNA/RNA)to run living organisms, very minute odds for a series of chance contingencies will appear pointing to the acceptance that chance could not have created this code. It is sort of a negative proof, but can reach a probability bound that will require the reasonable decision that something supernatural is going on. To understand this prediction, one must accept my definition of Darwinian evolution as passive. If it is purposeless, it is passive. If mutations are chance events, it is passive. If the number of contingent events required are 10 to the 100th power, the supernatural becomes the best bet.-I agree we have been jumping around. But issues that must be covered include cosmology, particle physics, quantum theory, the validity of the Darwin Theory, etc. I know you know this, but to my mind interesting findings pop up in many of these areas, and if I find something that I think applies, I think it should be exhibited for all to review. If you mind my jumping in to your conversations with dhw, I apologize. Just let me know.