philosophy of science: meaning and functions (Introduction)

by David Turell , Monday, October 01, 2018, 14:55 (2032 days ago) @ dhw

Dhw: […] if God exists, we can only imagine him by looking at his works: the great higgledy-piggledy bush of life extant and extinct, including humans “in his image”, creating their own pains and pleasures. And we can only imagine his purpose: perhaps a spectacle to relieve his boredom and isolation? After all, in spite of your hero Adler, you agree that God has our thoughts and his logic is like ours.

DAVID: Neat trick. Of course God thinks and some portion of his thinking and logic mirrors ours. That is all I have given you. I view his mind as exceedingly more powerful than ours in depth of thought and overall knowledge, and I suggest you should think of His mind in that context. Perhaps then you will quit humanizing Him so severely.

dhw: It’s not a trick! If your God exists, then of course his mind and knowledge and power are infinitely greater than ours, but you are the one who constantly talks of his purposefulness, and that is what we are discussing. You quite rightly argue that we can only guess at his purpose and his nature by studying his works. That is what both of us do. You conclude that his prime purpose was to create humans so that they would “recognize” him, he could have a relationship with us (though he remains hidden), and prove himself to us. All that is “humanizing”, and in my view inadequate as an explanation of the nature and history of his works. You have never been able to find a flaw in the logic of my hypothesis, but you simply can’t stand the thought that your God – whose thinking and logic mirrors ours “in some portion” – might mirror us in ways that don’t correspond to your own humanization of him. Your God as “first cause” was by definition isolated. According to you he ended his isolation by creating the universe and life in all its many forms extant and extinct. He must have had a reason for doing so. Once more: why do you find it illogical to suggest that he might have been bored with his isolation?

My view is that God has never been alone. Note my constant position that God always existed and made one universe after another. Why should we be the only one in an eternity of time? As for humanizing, do you realize any thoughts about His purposes and motives by humans will involve human level thought and a review of our emotions as we set out a purpose for Him. I admit that some of my suppositions are 'human', but I only think about His reasons because you push me to do so. On my own I have a great deal more of simply an acceptance of Him without delving into his motives, which have nothing to do whether He exists or not. I see proof of Him in the definite requirement for a designer. With a mind like His, of course He would design and He would want to create sentient beings who would wonder how He did it. Unlike Tony love is not an issue, only a possibility. I'm sure He is interested in us as He has been in all previous universes where humans developed in different way than we did, with different outcomes.