David's theory of evolution: James A. Shapiro's view (Evolution)

by dhw, Sunday, December 29, 2019, 10:45 (1789 days ago) @ David Turell

dhw: I doubt if many people have failed to recognize the gaps, but that does not invalidate his [Shapiro’s]/my theory since intelligence can bridge gaps far more quickly than chance.

DAVID: The point is absolutely established by your 'that intelligence can bridge gaps'. That is the design argument and my side believes intelligence is supplied and that intelligence cannot appear naturally in cells.

dhw: I know what you believe and don’t believe, but that does not alter the logic of Shapiro’s/my theory: IF cells are intelligent, the gaps will be bridged far more quickly than by chance. It’s exactly the same logic as: IF God exists and preprogrammed every undabbled change 3.8 billion years ago, the gaps will be bridged etc. (NB that does not mean the rest of your theory concerning your God’s purpose and method is logical.)

DAVID: Your theory with Shapiro is logical but does the capability really exist? Only bacteria know and they are not talking. You do not understand the concept of God as I do. Our concepts totally differ.

Yet again, that is why it is a theory and not a fact, and we are discussing the logic of the different theories (or concepts). Thank you again for accepting that this one is logical. It is indeed totally different from your own theory, the illogicality of which you have sometimes recognized and sometimes denied. (See “David’s theory of evolution Part Two”.)

DAVID: I'm sorry for your illogical thinking.

dhw: What illogical thinking? I have accepted the logic of the design theory, and you have accepted the logic of my alternatives to your own illogical combination of beliefs (all-knowing God, one purpose, inexplicably decides not to fulfil purpose for 3.X billion years and therefore has to design billions of non-human life forms, econiches etc. to keep life going).

DAVID: Same diffuse thinking. You want a God to instantly produce what He wishes. He has the right to do things differently: logically as He is in charge then history tells us what He did and in what order.

Same old mantra, and here is the same old reply: It is not the history or his right to do what he wishes that are in dispute, but your interpretation of his wishes and how he has set about fulfilling them. I do not “want” anything except perhaps an end to your repeated claims that the above combination is logical even though you can’t explain the logic, and that any logical explanation of his wishes and method is to be rejected because it “humanizes” God, even though God “very well could think like us”. (See "David’s theory of evolution Part Two".)