More Denton: A new book (Introduction)

by dhw, Saturday, February 27, 2016, 12:33 (3192 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: You are right. I wasn't clear. An IM would have to be as complex as a 3.8 billion year computer program as it represents the thinking and planning of God.-Not in the way you mean. See below.-dhw; If your God could create such a programme, or could intervene countless millions of times to supervise such matters as the building of the weaverbird's nest, why do you think he would be incapable of creating an autonomous mechanism that would produce precisely the same effects? That is the point I have made in response to your reviewer's argument - a point you seem to have missed.-DAVID: I don't know what I missed but I agree with your statement. Theistic evolution is, by my definition, completely guided by God, directly or indirectly by an IM.-You have missed the point that the IM I am proposing is AUTONOMOUS. An autonomous mechanism is not guided directly or indirectly. Once more: my alternative definition of theistic evolution is that your God deliberately invented a mechanism that would enable organisms to do their own inventing instead of him preprogramming or personally supervising every innovation, lifestyle and natural wonder. This is analogous to the human brain, which does its own inventing (unless you believe that God also preprogrammed the internal combustion engine and the works of Shakespeare). You are welcome to believe in your favoured scenario, but you and the reviewer do not have a monopoly on possible forms of theistic evolution.