philosophy of science: meaning and functions (Introduction)

by David Turell , Thursday, September 20, 2018, 23:47 (2255 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

DAVID: Exhibiting His powers of creation to offer proof of Himself to us, the observers who see proof of Him in his works.

dhw: Ugh, we weren’t even around to admire 90+% of the wonders he created. And what a strange way to prove his existence to us. All he had to do was stop hiding himself behind your quantum wall. Anyway, why would he want to prove himself to us? Does he want us to tell him how clever he is? Is he that humanly vain? If so, why can’t he also be that humanly bored that he wants to create strange creatures, including us, to relieve his isolation (as suggested in your first response)?

TONY: perhaps the reason is because he wants us to listen. Not because he is that vain, but because when you give credit where it doesn't belong, you are believing a lie, and will inevitably make a mistake.

DHW: Ah, so God created all these weird and wonderful creatures that came and went hundreds of millions of years before we came on the scene, in order to stop us from believing he didn’t make them. I really can’t follow this.

Tony: I was responding to the bolded text. As usual, you kind of paint even the idea of God in very negative tones. He's "bored", "vain" , egotistical, cowardly, apparently knows less than us, is capricious, and frivolous even.

I've stated repeatedly, which you choose to ignore, that the life forms that have inhabited the earth at every stage were there to essentially terraform the earth itself. Yes, there is a purpose outside humanity, though we are part of it. This is testable, observable fact. Even scientist don't disagree with the fact that all life lends itself to the overall balance of life itself on this planet, including the maintenance of the atmospheric weather, water generation and filtration, soil enrichment, metabolizing minerals into something more useful, solid and liquid toxicity level control, sequestration of toxic gasses, and production of life sustaining gasses, and serving as, or producing food (often both).

But I suppose the type of being that things of all that and so much more, while managing to make it all beautiful and wonderful, and creating creatures with the capacity to appreciate beauty and all the wondrous things, was just 'bored', 'vain', and frivolous. Oh, and he should just come one out and tell it all like it is, because that's how people learn and grow into intelligent, resourceful creatures, right?

David: Wow. I've been much more gentle about dhw and his persistence in humanizing God. I don't think he understands that God is not like us in any way.

Tony:I wasn't trying to be rude about it, but that is how his line of thought comes across. If we point to purpose, he almost always reverts to "God was just bored"(frivolous, capricious). If I answer a question about why he may have done something a certain way, he generally reverts to some variation of "God didn't do it in a way I like, so he must be egotistical(arrogant, less powerful, vain, more ignorant(experimenting/dabbling/making corrections). And when push comes to shove, he reverts to "Well why doesn't he just pop out and set us straight?", implying either cowardice, indifference, apathy, or a sadistic sense of voyeurism.

The part that bugs me is not simply that DHW says these things, but rather that I rarely, if ever, see an honest review of the flip side of the possibility coin from him. What if God were intelligent, powerful, wise, loving, and had a sense of fairness/balance/justice, that is simply not our own? Might he have done or allowed the things that occurred for a loftier goal than we can conceive? Does he have the right/power/authority/knowledge/power to do so? Would his other qualities, if they exist, provide some balance to his allowing/causing things to happen?

At least we are not secretly psychoanalyzing him behind his back. He has a problem he does not see in himself, and you have explained it better than i have in the past.