autonomy v. automaticity (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Sunday, April 08, 2018, 15:47 (499 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Again you have twisted the argument about survival. Nothing beyond bacteria was necessary, therefore it was arranged as a required advance, which is strong evidence for a designed advance.

dhw: If God exists, then of course he designed the initial mechanisms for advance. That does not mean he specially designed the weaverbird’s nest and millions of other lifestyles and wonders extant and extinct for the sole purpose of creating the brain of Homo sapiens!

All part of balance of nature to supply energy for evolution to proceed over 3.8 billion years.


DAVID: On the issue of relationship, if Humans are God's goal, of course He has a purpose of a relationship…

dhw: And what do you think might be the non-humanized purpose of his wanting non-humanized recognition and a non-humanized relationship?

To have the sort of relationship we have, one requiring faith.

DAVID: ….but that is not the same as your idea that He wanted to watch a spectacle of diversity, which implies to me God is a 'showoff' in your view, saying "look what I can produce in variety".

dhw: Sorry, but that is plain daft. Unless there are other gods watching, who the heck could he show off to? Have you never experienced the pleasure of creating something you enjoy? And what do you enjoy more: a spectacle in which every item is predictable, or one in which you are constantly being surprised?

A total humanization of God! A distant God is showing off to us who marvel at his creations.

DAVID: As for a group of other goals, with humans as the primary one, all others are basically secondary and subordinated to that one, as balance of nature, the one I offered. I might ask why do you want me to produce a group of other God's purposes. He might not have any.

dhw: A short time ago you denied that you regarded the human brain as God’s only purpose, and I challenged you to name other purposes. All you came up with was “balance of nature”, which turned out to be geared to the production of the human brain. Therefore God specially designed the weaverbird’s nest plus a few million other special designs extant and extinct in order to be able to produce the human brain. The only explanation you have offered for this illogicality is that God’s logic is different from ours (i.e. mine). Maybe it’s not.

I think it is very logical. Sorry you don't

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum