Pointy eggs and whales (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Sunday, September 16, 2018, 15:10 (66 days ago) @ dhw

TONY: If you will note, the point I was referring to is the point of faith. Faith is "he assured expectation of things though not beheld". In short, it is believing without seeing. Choosing not to believe is choosing not to have faith, even if you follow it with the statement that you are not choosing to disbelieve. That is why I said it is a false third option.

dhw: I have challenged your statement that science is the best evidence, and your answer is that faith is believing without seeing – the exact opposite of science. So for you clearly science is not the best evidence. And I have no idea why neither believing nor disbelieving is a false option.

DAVID: I'm with dhw. Choosing to be neutral is a valid option. It means abandoning the thought of first cause as a valid consideration.

dhw: Thank you for your first statement. No thanks for your second statement. My neutrality concerns the nature of the first cause: either it is your magical God or it is an impersonal universe that magically produced life. I find it impossible to choose between the two forms of magic.

But there is no third option , and God is a much more logical option than the alchemy of inorganic sources from an 'impersonal universe'. As for your dislike of my second statement what made the impersonal universe but a first cause?


GK: […]I actually don't care as much as I used to, the discoveries in the last ten years point the universe being life itself. we are just part of an endless series of events. the universe is quantum computing right now, in fact, it is quantum computing you and me. The question is "did it self-organize?" or "Does it have surroundings that formed it in the same manner the biosphere formed us?" both are unknowns, I accept that, but I do wonder.

dhw: I’m not sure what you mean by the universe having “surroundings”, or by the observation about the universe being life itself. For me the question is whether the universe and its materials self-organized, which included life itself, or there is some form of intelligence that did the organizing.

DAVID: Logically I strongly doubt inanimate material can self-organize into living matter. It is a matter of complexity. Life is so much more complex in organization than inanimate matter.

dhw: I should have been more specific with my “some form of intelligence”, because self-organizing does not preclude intelligence (I’m thinking of the atheistic form of panpsychism). I meant the single mind you call God.

Now you have substituted the magical appearance of intelligence in any matter. The appearance of intelligence requires the origination of information which is not descriptive but organizational. Now you have three magics from which to choose.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum