autonomy v. automaticity (Evolution)

by dhw, Monday, April 02, 2018, 10:42 (138 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: You and I differ on the degree of God's purposefulness. God created the universe and evolved it. God created the Earth as a perfect planet for life to appear, and evolved it. And finally He evolved the human brain. A clear succession of purpose and result.
dhw: Not the “degree” of purpose. The purpose itself. Millions of other life forms, lifestyles and natural wonders extant and extinct also evolved (a clear succession of purpose and result if your God set the process in motion), and how the heck you know that evolution has now finished is beyond me. Let’s meet in a few billion years from now, and see what life has to offer before we use the word “finally”.

DAVID: My discussion above did not include the idea that 'finally' meant finished. It doesn't have to, but I don't think any large saltations are in order. The entire diversity of life is necessary for the balance of nature. The point you make is it always stays in balance. True but did it ever occur to you is that life was purposely designed to maintain that necessary balance?

First you try to make out that God’s “final” purpose is the production of the human brain, and then you say it is not “final”. Then you shift the discussion away to the balance of nature. The point I make is not that the diversity of life always stays in balance! My point is that the balance constantly changes, according to which species survive and which do not. You constantly try to equate “balance of nature” with some non-existent universal norm (the “necessary balance”), which is absurd. If there were nothing left on Earth except bacteria, you would still have a balance, and it would favour bacteria. All your examples illustrate the restricted use of the term, which relates to human interference destroying the CURRENT balance of nature and thereby threatening the existence or health of all species including ourselves. You keep agreeing that this is the only valid use of the term, but then you scurry back to it as if every historical shift in the balance somehow cohered into evidence that your God’s purpose was the production of the human brain. Fact: the ever changing bush of life, including humans. Proposed theistic “purpose and result”: the ever changing bush of life, including humans. Prediction: que sera sera. Objections?

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum