Universal Intelligence (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by George Jelliss , Crewe, Monday, September 21, 2009, 13:03 (5541 days ago) @ dhw

dhw writes: "First things first. I agree that there is no scientific evidence [for a universal intelligence], and that its existence can't be proved. Belief in the god theory requires faith. That is one reason why I'm not a theist or a deist. The theory that chance can put together the ingredients for reproduction, life, consciousness, emotion etc. also has no scientific evidence to support it, and until there is proof (if there ever is), belief in the chance theory also requires faith. And that is one reason why I'm not an atheist. We seem to have different starting-points." -Yes we do have different starting points. This is not a question of having faith in anything. It is merely a question of Where do we start from? The answer is that we start by as far as possible assuming nothing. Then we look at the evidence. The evidence for a material universe is overwhelming, it has been worked out in minute detail in the sciences of physics, chemistry and biology, and we even have a detailed scenario back to a tiny fraction of time after the big bang. On the other hand, the evidence for a universal intelligence is as far as I can make out merely anecdotal and based on poetic fancies.-Your idea that "The theory that chance can put together the ingredients for reproduction, life, consciousness, emotion etc. also has no scientific evidence to support it." I regard as manifest nonsense. The evidence for this being the case is overwhelming. Though of course I dispute your propaganda that places emphasis on "chance" rather than "natural causes" in general.-dhw continues: "Since you are not even prepared to consider the god theory, you close your mind to any evidence that might support it." -Certainly not. I have considered the evidence and found it wanting. Possibly more important: I have also considered the "theory" and found it wanting. What are the axioms on which it is based? What are the laws of its operation? -dhw writes: "Everything connected with our spiritual, emotional, intellectual, artistic, psychic experiences. /// These experiences suggest the possibility ... no more than that ... of something beyond the material world as we know it. /// How does a universal intelligence carry out its work? /// One answer to your question might be that the universal intelligence has the same control over the physical material of the universe as my will has over my body." -You question Dawkins' statement that "Evolution is the creator of life"? In his article written in response to the question: "Where does evolution leave God?" He argues: "What is so special about life? It never violates the laws of physics. /// Never once are the laws of physics violated, yet life emerges /// And how is the trick done? The answer is /// the nonrandom survival of randomly varying coded information. /// To midwife such emergence is the singular achievement of Darwinian evolution. It starts with primeval simplicity and fosters, by slow, explicable degrees, the emergence of complexity." -As I understand your position, the only point where you disagree with this thesis, since you don't dispute the laws of physics or that evolution occurs, is the first appearance of the primeval simplicity of a replicating molecule. Your claims are based entirely on what you see as the improbability or impossibility of this step. The evidence shows that it happened. So it is not impossible. So to overcome the improbability, as you estimate it, of this step you postulate the intervention of an even more improbable designer, who carries out this intervention by means of the application of willpower, i.e. psychokinesis. Forgive me if I laugh!

--
GPJ