Unanswered questions (General)

by dhw, Thursday, May 09, 2019, 12:04 (2023 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: Why is it so important for you to tell us that your God’s one and only purpose was to produce H. sapiens? What is your point? I would have thought that anyone who believed this would regard it as a mere stepping-stone to the question of WHY his God produced him – but apparently that is forbidden territory!

DAVID: Nothing is forbidden! I think all of us would agree that if God is in change He wanted to produce humans, because we are the current endpoint of evolution. As far as 'me' being produced that is a matter of odds with sperm and egg, not God. As to the past discussions about God's reasons for producing us, we have covered all possibilities we can think of, which proves nothing.

dhw: Nothing can be proved, and that is why we offer hypotheses and then test their likelihood. If we don’t do so, there will be nothing for us to discuss! And still you refuse to tell us why it is so important for you to tell us that God’s only purpose was to produce H. sapiens. What is your point?

DAVID: I don't have a point. I have a conclusion, based on the realization that evolution appears driven, not at random. Aquatic mammals show that point. Humans are a totally unexpected result with their consciousness- bearing giant brains. Design is required. Only a reasoning brain can design the living complexities we observe. Therefore there is a God who runs the show. All logical for me to accept.

A sequence of non sequiturs. I agree that evolution is driven and not random, and aquatic animals do indeed show that point, since all their restructuring is clearly driven by the need to make adjustments to life in the water. I agree that human consciousness is special, though I have no idea who you think was around to “expect” or not “expect” this outcome. However, as you are constantly at pains to point out, every unique feature and natural wonder is “totally unexpected”, since bacteria have coped perfectly well since the beginning. I agree with you that design is required for all the complexities, including those that distinguish one species from another, and I have no quarrel with your logic in concluding that a designing brain may have been responsible – but responsible for what? Again we go back to your programming/dabbling hypothesis and my cellular intelligence hypothesis. You simply cannot tell me that your God is incapable of designing autonomous cellular intelligence as the designing mechanism of evolution, and so we are left with the fact that neither your hypothesis nor mine is proven. Stalemate if you wish to use that line of argument.