Natures Wonders- living fossils (Introduction)

by David Turell , Wednesday, November 22, 2017, 15:02 (2558 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: I fully understand your agnosticism. You see the need for design, but can't find a designer.

dhw: It’s not that simple. I see a conscious designer (your God), atheistic chance and atheistic panpsychism as equally unbelievable explanations. And so actual belief, as you have always acknowledged, requires faith – i.e wilfully closing one’s eyes to the great gaps in all three hypotheses. I can’t do that. Your explanation of my agnosticism is therefore too one-sided. An atheist would say: “You see the absurdity of the supernatural God hypothesis, but you can’t find a natural explanation for life.”
However, one of those hypotheses must be closer to the truth than the others, so I am horribly wrong one way or the other!

DAVID: Your phrase, 'closer to the truth' is the key to your thinking. I view one of the three as THE truth. You imply there is possibly a fourth way or more and we can never know for sure, and you cannot except anything beyond absolute proof.

dhw: “Closer to the truth” allows for variations (such as polytheism, pantheism). No, we can never know for sure unless there is an afterlife when all is revealed, and you know as well as I do that otherwise absolute proof is impossible. The best you can do is shut your eyes to the flaws in whatever hypothesis you choose, or stay on the fence. I continue to have respect for those who make a choice, so long as they don’t ridicule those who choose differently, and I expect them to have the same respect for my non-choice – which I know from our long years of friendship that you do.

I absolutely respect your non-choice. Our discussion allows all others to review their own choices.