dhw: big brain evolution:comparing chimp and brain organoids (Evolution)

by dhw, Sunday, March 24, 2019, 10:52 (2069 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Wed, 6 March at 18:38:I believe He is in full control. You are the one who is not sure of that because you don't accept God's powers, and I know that. […]

DAVID: (Thursday 21 March at 18:43) I don't know if God is really all-powerful, as I've considered the issue, and fully understand He might have limits as He directs evolution.

DAVID: My belief He is full control covers both sides of your problem in discussion with me. Full control means He has the total right to choose His method of creation.

dhw: Of course he has the right to choose, but if he has limits, he can’t be in full control!

DAVID: If you choose to turn right or left, aren't you in full control? You imply He might be constrained by limits. WE have no idea if your supposition that He has limits is true.

It is not my supposition! I offer different hypotheses, all of which fit in with what you call the “real history” of life, and I do not profess to believe in any of them. I am trying to make sense of your own pronouncements, which vary from one week to the next, as bolded above. The hypothesis that he has limits would support the hypothesis that the bush of life resulted from experimentation if his aim was to produce a thinking being like himself. The hypothesis that he is all-powerful in conjunction with the bush of life negates the hypothesis that his one and only aim right from the start was humans; but it supports the hypothesis that he deliberately gave evolution a free rein though still allowing for dabbles.

DAVID (under “Genome complexity”): God chose to evolve humans over time. The only thing I do not know is His thought process in making that choice. You have agreed He has the right to choose, and I've agreed He might have limits as a reason. Nothing wrong with my hypothesis under those circumstances.

Precisely. That leads to the experimentation hypothesis but negates your hypothesis of “full control” (6 March).

DAVID: Your doubts about God's abilities are all reasonable for you to entertain, since we are in an area where there is no factual material to study except the path of evolution.

They are not my doubts. Once more: they are hypotheses that offer logical explanations for the bush of life. As above, the limits which you now accept as a possibility would explain why he did not directly fulfil what you believe was his one and only purpose. But that means he is not in “full control” (contradicting your statement on 6 March).

DAVID: Adler is not off point. His view of the especial nature (consciousness) of humans is we are God's special creation and purpose.

dhw: The point of this discussion is your interpretation of your God’s purpose in relation to how evolution works. If humans were his sole purpose (Adler), you yourself have no idea why he specially designed countless life forms to eat or not eat one another until he specially designed H. sapiens. As above: One possible explanation is that your God has limits, and therefore was experimenting. Do you accept this as a reasonable explanation?

DAVID: I have agreed it is a possibility in any discussion about God's method, but it offers no consideration of the point humans are different in kind, and therefore are a special result of evolution.

I have no problem with the argument that humans are special. And experimentation is precisely the hypothesis that can explain why a God whose only purpose was to design a thinking being like himself spent 3.5+ billion years designing millions of other life forms.

DAVID: Your asking just reflects your own doubts about God's powers. You keep harping on 'delay' of human appearance . That is a human 'impatient' style judgment.

As always you try to gloss over the fact that it is the combination of your hypotheses that defies all logic. All powerful God + one and only purpose + special design of millions of econiches, life forms, lifestyles and lifestyles before specially design of only thing he wants to design = scenario which even you admit you cannot understand.