God and evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Tuesday, March 28, 2017, 14:00 (2795 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw:You have offered two explanations [for the late arrival of humans]:
1 God could not do it immediately because he has limitations.
2 God preferred to do it that way, but you can’t explain why.
DAVID: Why do I have to explain why?
dhw: Nobody has to explain anything. I just thought you and I were interested in trying to make sense of the world we live in.

dhw: I agree that both hypotheses – an all-powerful versus a limited God – are reasonable.
DAVID: Yes, either/or.
dhw: ...you rejected [the first hypothesis] because: “...any power that can produce a fine-tuned universe can then see to the creation of humans without difficulty.”
DAVID: You did not understand the full implications of that statement which I did not fully explain: God created the universe from His mind or thoughts, that is, His consciousness. I believe that consciousness is at a quantum mechanics level, which is why our reality is based on a quantum underpinning. A mind which can create a fine-tuned universe from thought can easily create a process of evolution which ends up with conscious humans. Nothing inconsistent here. This introduces the idea that speciation is also at a quantum level within the genome that we have not yet found, although we do know that some living processes are at a quantum level, such as photosynthesis, for example.

I’m sorry, but none of this changes the fact that your statement is a rejection (“totally off the reservation”) of the hypothesis that God did not fulfil his purpose of producing humans for 3.X billion years BECAUSE OF HIS LIMITATIONS. I agree that he may have limitations. Your rejection of your own explanation leaves you with an all-powerful God and, by your own admission, no explanation except to say that maybe God wanted it that way (which is not an explanation), and why do you have to explain why?

DAVID: 'Limited' is part of either/or reasoning. We can't know which is correct, and you keep implying a need for exactitude! Really!

How can I be demanding exactitude when I offer THREE possible and perfectly logical explanations for the “delay”? They are different hypotheses, and I do not insist on any of them. The exactitude is yours, not mine: namely, that God’s purpose from the beginning was to produce humans, and “everything else was related to that goal”.

dhw: They are not suppositions but alternative possible explanations. Your God could not produce humans straight away (= limitations), OR he didn’t think of humans till later, OR he designed evolution to follow its own paths, but did an occasional dabble which may have included humans. What is not clear?
DAVID: Yes, He is limited or not. However your supposition that He only thought of humans later is very strange.

Once more: not a supposition, but one of three alternative explanations for the late arrival of humans.

DAVID: He first created a fine-tuned universe to have life. But it didn't occur to Him to create conscious humans who could relate to His consciousness until later? Possible but very unlikely for a thinking mind who started with the Big Bang. You imply He had no idea where He was headed, no goal in mind. I find that wooly thinking. You want to propose He had no purpose in mind when He started the process? I find that very hard to believe.

I do not imply that he had no purpose – on the contrary, I am the one who emphasizes purpose on two levels: a) why did he create life, and (b) why have there been millions of life forms, lifestyles and natural wonders extant and extinct? Since you cannot explain b) in relation to your theory that his purpose was to create humans, you have ended up by asking why you should have to explain it! We are just supposed to accept your anthropocentric interpretation of evolution without question.

dhw: …there are interesting changes taking place in your vocabulary. Earlier it became “a” goal instead of “the” goal, and in this post you refer to your God’s “primary” purpose. Perhaps you would elaborate on what you think may have been his other goals/purposes.
DAVID: Humans were His main purpose. Everything else relates to that goal. Do you have any purposes for Him He might want to achieve?

If you say his “main” purpose for creating life was humans, he must have had other purposes. Please let us know what you think they are. I have already offered you a different main purpose, which fits in perfectly with your theory that he is hidden and is observing us: namely, that he created a spectacle for himself to watch. Two of the hypotheses I have offered fit in with this basic purpose, they ALL explain the fact that humans came late on the scene, and between them they present the either/or that you have advocated: limited powers (which you have rejected as “totally off reservation”), or unlimited powers (humans were a later idea as the spectacle unfolded, possibly through an autonomous IM plus whatever dabbling he fancied). The last two hypotheses allow for God to change the course of the show if he feels like it. You agree that ALL of them fit the facts as we know them, but you reject them because they conflict with your suppositions, which you acknowledge do not make sense, i.e. for which you cannot find a clear explanation.