By FRANS de WAAL on animal cognition (Introduction)

by dhw, Friday, April 22, 2016, 15:05 (3136 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw (re “watched over”): A delightfully vague expression. Either he organized the environmental changes without which evolution could not have happened, or he didn't.-DAVID: Why do you insist on exactitude. We have made inferences based on what we know and see. God is hidden. His motives are hidden. Only the conclusion that it takes a mind to do the designs has strength.-dhw: I agree with your last observation. But you do not stop there, and my insistence is a response to your insistence. Here are the exactitudes you insist on: God's intention in creating the universe and life was to produce and/or feed humans; organisms are incapable of organizing their own innovations, lifestyles and natural wonders, and so he had to “guide” them all; therefore all of them, extant and extinct, must have been preprogrammed or “guided” by God for the purpose of providing for humans. If you insist that God "guided" evolution, why is it wrong to ask whether he also "guided" the environmental conditions without which evolution could not have taken place?-DAVID: You don't seem to realize the list of exactitudes above you have elicited from me are from your questions demanding exactitude. I've simply concluded that evolution is a process guided by God. Since humans are a very surprising result, that Gould says is a "glorious accident", it is easy to assume that humans appeared not by chance or accident. My theory really goes no further than that. Further it is obvious that speciation is not by chance, and planning for it requires a mind. One- celled organisms can run their lives with simple reactive chemicals, as our cells do. 'nuff said.-Your “simple” conclusion gradually expands (“further...Further…”) to end up with precisely the theory I outlined above! Any theory needs to be tested against whatever facts are known, and you do not hesitate to challenge alternative theories such as chance and autonomous intelligence on the grounds that they do not correspond to the facts as you see them. And even if you were to confine yourself to “evolution is a process guided by God” (which you don't), you can hardly complain if I ask what “guided” actually means in relation to innovation, lifestyle and natural wonders, bearing in mind that evolution has to conform to the restrictions laid down by the environment. But I do understand your reluctance to delve, when delving brings out so many difficult questions.