philosophy of science: meaning and functions (Introduction)

by David Turell , Wednesday, September 26, 2018, 19:35 (2039 days ago) @ dhw

TONY: As for the mechanisms for all of our different emotions, yes, they were designed by him, but again, I ask why. Spectacle is not a good answer because it has no real explanatory power. It has no explanatory power because these mechanisms and the way they maneuver organismal behaviors all point to purposes of protecting an organism, encouraging purposeful growth, or building social bonds. […] Why would a god indifferent to suffering bother designing such a mechanism?

dhw: Each life continues for a limited period; each organism is capable of different responses and behaviours. If your God exists, I suggest this is what he WANTED to create, and his motive was to provide a spectacle to relieve the boredom of eternal isolation. This can also entail learning, as say below. I don’t know why you feel this has no explanatory power.

TONY: As for how God grows, I imagine that he grows much the same way we do: observation, analysis, study, reflection, then using what was learned to increase his sphere of influence.

dhw: Sounds good to me, except “sphere of influence”. I’d have thought that if he’s capable of creating the universe and life (with or without the son acting as foreman), there aren’t many spheres he can’t influence.

DAVID: I repeat: unless viewed as a God with supreme purpose in mind, analysis of how He thinks will be skewed. All He has done has purpose.

TONY: I don't disagree, and neither does the bible.

dhw: And nor do I. If your God exists, I have no doubt that he would have had a purpose: perhaps to break his eternal isolation by providing a spectacle. This might provide him with new experiences from which to learn (Tony’s proposal).

dhw: I wasn’t asking you to blame God. I was pointing out that it requires faith to believe in a loving, caring God.

TONY: Yes it requires faith and He does not have to be loving or caring. […] Further unless God's personality and thought pattern are not viewed in the realm of pure purpose, the interpretation will not be accurate.

dhw: Nobody knows which interpretation is accurate, or what the purpose might have been.

Evolution is a guide to purpose. Look at what has appeared against all odds, humans! The complexity of evolution and life require as designer.

dhw (to David): Why are you so sure your God created humans without ever having experienced any of the thoughts that humans have?

DAVID: Since we are in His image our thoughts are similar but His are not at a human level of understanding. Always remember the difference. The image is only mental.

dhw: What is this “level of understanding”? Either he has experienced certain thoughts or he hasn’t.

Quibbling: God is not human. Of course He has our thoughts, but with His degree of creation powers He is thinking at a level we cannot reach. Again, you can't seem to leave your humanizing view of Him, probably ground in your inability to accept His existence at His level of power.