Evolution took a long time (Introduction)

by dhw, Wednesday, February 22, 2017, 13:39 (2831 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: That suits me fine. How does the organism FREELY try a change if it does not have an autonomous, intelligent, inventive mechanism?

DAVID: But it may well have a mechanism with God dabbling as necessary.

BBELLA: But if God consciously (or better said, God conscious) dwells within all that IS, God can just as easily (if not more easily) dabble from within all that IS. So that would mean God that dwells outside all that IS (if there is such), would not have to watch over all that IS (every thing) and say to himself..."oh, not doing as I choose, so I must dabble here or there". That really makes no sense. At the quantum level, nothing is automatic and nothing is an automaton. So it makes no sense to say that God dabbles. All that IS, is what it IS, because at a quantum level, all is connected and moving towards a dual purpose: it's own purpose as well as the purpose of the whole.

dhw: I’m not convinced that the whole has a purpose, but this is a fascinating approach to our subject. If God is inside ALL THAT IS, he should be able to direct organisms any way he pleases. If things go wrong and require a dabble, it CAN only be because organisms can act independently, and how do they manage that if he's inside them? Curiouser and curiouser!

DAVID: If God guides evolution as His process to produce humans, He has to dabble. Evidence of His works is in the new design of new species, which is obvious in all of evolution that jumps huge gaps in form and function. Only a planning mind can do it

I have tried to follow through on the claim that God is “within” all things. If so, then how can things go wrong and require a “dabble”? That would mean he has to rectify his own mistakes. Corrective dabbling would only be necessary if organisms were able to do their own thing independently of God: and that means an autonomous, intelligent, inventive mechanism – a possibility which you have accepted but reject whenever it comes down to concrete examples such as carnivorous plants and the frog’s tongue, not to mention the weaverbird’s nest.