autonomy v. automaticity (Evolution)

by dhw, Sunday, February 11, 2018, 12:56 (9 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Look at what He produced. That is what He wanted…

dhw: I have looked at what he produced: an ever changing higgledy-piggledy bush. That suggests to me that he wanted an ever-changing higgledy-piggledy bush.

DAVID: I am convinced God operates with purpose. He created a universe fine-tuned for life, an Earth fine-tuned for life and then life itself. Then He saw to it that the human brain with consciousness arrived. Nothing like your interpretation.

If God exists, I would share all your convictions, and he may even have dabbled human consciousness. What doesn’t make sense is that he should take so much trouble personally designing millions of innovations, lifestyles and natural wonders, when all he wants is the brain of Homo sapiens. So what is wrong with the hypothesis that he WANTED the ever changing bush of life?

DAVID: How do you/we know how God thinks. We don't.

No, we don’t, so why are you so firmly convinced that God does NOT think like us, and therefore your illogical explanation is more valid than my logical explanations?

dhw: Would you accept an atheist's dismissal of your logical case for design on the grounds that nature doesn't follow your human logic?

DAVID: But it does appear designed as Dawkins admits, so what is illogical?

Dawkins attributes what “appears” to be designed to natural causes, not to a God. Do you accept his logic on the grounds that Nature doesn’t follow your human logic?

DAVID: You clearly can't see that evolution took lots of time. Balance of nature provides the energy allowing life to evolve more complex life. Pristine clear.

dhw: I am as aware as you are that the current theory is that life has been going on for about 3.8 billion years. Yes, that’s lots of time. And life needs energy. And the balance of nature changes according to which organisms can get enough energy to keep going. And multicellularity has led to increasing complexity. None of this means that your God took thousands of millions of years to personally design every innovation, lifestyle and natural wonder extant and extinct, when all he wanted was the brain of Homo sapiens. You admit that it’s not logical, and so you convince yourself that your God’s logic must be different from ours.

DAVID: But the appearance of the human brain took 3.8 billion years. God may not need instant gratification for His purposes. I have never said what God does is illogical. What I have said is I have not understood why whales are here except for balance of nature in oceans, as an example of things I don't understand. In your attempt to humanize Him, He seems illogical to you.

“Instant gratification” suggests pleasure in the fulfilment of one’s desires. Very human. Maybe the ever changing bush was the desire he gratified. It is not God who seems illogical to me, but your explanation of his motives and methods! If you don’t understand his logic yourself, that means for you it is illogical. He wanted it that way (your usual response) does not provide a logical explanation. I even offer you logical theistic explanations, and your only response is that God’s logic is different from ours. Maybe it isn’t.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum