Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Saturday, May 30, 2020, 21:14 (504 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID (re leaf-biting): You are having Miss Bee reaching a solution relating the two very separate events on one observation! No true scientist would make that obvious mistake. Nor would any rational human.

dhw: I’m pleased you have realized that Miss Bee was not a true scientist or a rational human. In my hypothetical scenario, she passed on her one observation, and when other bees tried the trick, it worked. If it hadn’t worked, my guess is that they wouldn’t have bothered any more. What’s your problem?

Total irrationality. How can one make any observation of two disparate events and reach a conclusion of any connection? It requires multiple munchings and multiple early flowerings to realize the connectionality at the human level, much less the little bee level. Simply repeating your fairy tale is no real answer to my point, which means you have no answer.

DAVID: Autonomous intelligence comes from the appearance of automatic but reasonable reactions.

dhw: Try telling that to yourself when you defend your belief in free will. “Autonomous” means free to control itself; “automatic” means not free to control itself.

Free will doesn't apply here.

dhw: I just can’t understand why your all-powerful God would create 100-200 billion galaxies just for the sake of producing H. sapiens. The same problem as with all those different extinct life forms etc. over 3.X thousand million years, when he only wanted one. […]

DAVID: I don't need to know his reasoning, if I accept history as the evidence for his choice, I know His choice, and guesses as to his possible reasons are just guesses. [...]

dhw: And so once again you slide over the illogical COMBINATION of your rigid beliefs! Which choice do you “know”? We both believe evolution happened, and so if God exists, evolution was his choice of method to fulfil whatever may have been his purpose. You do not “know” that 1) H. sapiens was his purpose, or 2) that he directly designed every life form, natural wonder etc., or 3) that he is all-powerful, always in control, and can do whatever he wants in any way that he wants. These three guesses of yours leave you with “no idea” how to fit them together with the history of evolution, and so you would prefer to stop reasoning, and to reject any alternatives to your three guesses because – more of your “logic” - they entail thought patterns similar to ours although according to you he probably/possibly has thought patterns similar to ours.

DAVID: Again the dishonest distorted 'no idea' mantra. Any ideas would be unproven useless guesses.

dhw: The three ideas I have bolded and numbered above are unproven guesses. And you cannot even guess why your all-powerful God (guess no. 3) would directly design every non-human life form etc. (guess no, 2), although his only purpose was to design H. sapiens (guess no. 1). The distortion lies in your refusal to recognize that your theory is based on irreconcilable guesses. The only “fact” we agree on (some people reject it, though) is that life developed from single cells through a vast bush of diverse forms, culminating (so far) in humans.

You have never fully explained why you think parts of my theory don't stick together. If I understood your reasoning perhaps we can have a real debate.

DAVID: And the next distortion about similar thought patterns. The similarity I accept for God and us is only logical thought.

dhw: But you have no idea what logic could lie behind the combination of your three guesses above, so that’s not much help. And you persistently try to disown your own statement that “He and we probably have similar thought patterns and emotions beyond just simple logical thought” – which is a perfectly reasonable proposal, since even you have proposed that our consciousness is part of his consciousness.

What I disowned out of context is beside the point. He may have similar patterns of thought, but that doesn't tell us His reasoning for his goal, the main issue.

DAVID: His reasons for his purposes are His alone. All of my logic fits history. Our difference is our individual concepts of human specialness. You keep minimizing the gap from other animals that preceded us and I see it very much larger than you do. Our consciousness is totally unexplained and really should be viewed as unexpected. Since only a designing mind could have produced this result you reject it.

dhw: You accuse me of distortion, and then persistently run back to this distortion of your own. Once more, I have NEVER disputed the huge gap between our consciousness and that of other organisms, and I accept the logic of the design argument. I have even offered you two logical theistic theories of evolution (experimentation and new ideas) that allow for our specialness AND for the 3.X billion years’ worth of non-human life. Please stop continually dodging the issue of your three irreconcilable guesses by shifting the focus to a disagreement you have manufactured.

Once again , I don't see them as irreconcilable, which you offer without a thorough discussion of you problems with it.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum