Natures wonders: seabirds food finding flight patterns (Introduction)

by David Turell , Monday, April 20, 2020, 15:54 (1676 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Trial and error does imply intellectual analysis of experience. I don't think the birds are capable of that. You insist upon intelligence everywhere, when it may be an appearance of intelligence, and nothing more, as in cellular functions.

dhw: I do not expect you to abandon your fixed beliefs, but I do expect a fair hearing for alternatives. When you agree that you have a 50/50 chance of being wrong, I am content. But the next minute you insist that you are 100% right, as in statements such as “This is not a sign of bird intelligence.”

A non-answer. Does trial an d error require intelligent analysis?

dhw: You state unequivocally that your all-powerful God designed the bad viruses, and he did so in order to test us. How do you know either of these claims, and why would he want to test us? Nothing to do with atheism.

DAVID: Difference in interpretation as usual. My view is God knew bad viruses would appear as a result of His evolutionary process, and our big brain would provide ways to solve the problems that might arise. 'Decided to test us' is your view of what I have just written.

dhw: No it isn’t. On 14 April I wrote that I remembered you telling us that “he designed these things to test us” but since you had written that he “allowed” such things to evolve, I assumed you wouldn’t say so now. You replied “Yes, I would. Your memory of my thought about these disease challenges is correct.” And you keep saying he gave us our brains to solve the problems. When pressed, you have also conceded that he directly designed the bad viruses – as opposed to he knew they would appear.

You have me at a disadvantage. I can't go back to a specific debate to see context, which you always leave out. We've established God used viruses to guide evolution. We know viruses continue to evolve as we fight some of them. God must have allowed this degree of freedom. My impression, as before, is God allowed this to happen, and I cannot guess as to His reasons, but our big brain surely helps.

dhw: Here’s another theory for you: God set up all the mechanisms for life and for evolution of life, and then let those mechanisms do their own thing. No “humanizing” at all here, so you’ll have to abandon that escape route, and no intellectual knot-tying trying to find a reason why he specially designed the baddies. Can you find any logical weakness in it when you compare it to the actual history of life?

DAVID: Our views of God differ widely, no surprise. Now you've reintroduce your loosey-goosey God who gives up total control. My God is too purposeful to give up total control. Both God's fit history. You are correct, not a humanizing issue at this level of discussion. Your humanizing occurs when you apply human motives to God.

dhw: So tell us why your God wants to test us. As for the silly idea of “loosey-goosey” (as if God would not be God if he created autonomous organisms) see the comments on free will under “David’s theory of evolution”

You've answered this yourself below

.
DAVID: You see God's actions as creating errors. I see it as God recognizing potential problems for us in how He developed evolution, so we are given a giant brain to solve issues. Why didn't the 'all-powerful God' you constantly refer to, just give us a cushy problem-free existence? Apparently not His plan. Would a non-challenged life be really enjoyable, or shouldn't we struggle a bit to have the enjoyment of discovery and reaching solutions?

dhw: I don’t have a problem with your God deliberately creating “errors” – your word, not mine - in order to see how we cope (remember, you think he’s watching us with interest).

The bold is my thought also.