Back to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Tuesday, August 25, 2020, 18:43 (339 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: If he exists, and since we both believe that evolution happened, of course he chose to evolve his creations! But that does not mean that his sole purpose was to produce H. sapiens and food supply, that he directly designed every species, econiche, lifestyle, strategy and natural wonder, or that every species etc. was directly designed as “part of the goal of evolving humans”. You have admitted that you have “no idea” why he would have chosen such a method to achieve such a goal, so perhaps we can end this repetitive discussion if you simply say this is your belief and you couldn’t care less about logic.

DAVID: Your prime objection is the interpretation of God's purpose. I'm with Adler in that humans were God's prime purpose. If you wish to challenge Adler's powerful book, critique it for me.

dhw: My prime objection is to the illogical combination of your beliefs as bolded above. If humans were your God’s ONLY purpose, I have proposed experimentation as an explanation of the 3.X billion years’ worth of non-human, directly created and now extinct life forms, econiches etc. If humans were A PRIME purpose, I have proposed that the idea came to him later on in life’s history, and not at the beginning. This too would explain the 3.X billion years’ worth…If an ever changing variety of life forms, lifestyles, strategies, wonders etc, was his purpose, that would also explain the ever changing variety of life forms, lifestyles, wonders etc. – and humans unquestionably provide the widest possible variety of lifestyles, strategies, wonders etc., so they would fit in perfectly with his desire for endless variety.

Your constant attempt to present a God who finds His way along during the process is purely a humanized God. The reason we will never agree is my vision of God has a different personality than the God you envision. Humans WERE God's purpose and He evolved us, a method He chose for His own reasons. You find my belief illogical. So be it. I don't accept yours

Transferred from the “error” thread:

DAVID: I can make 'possible' human considerations by God, but not consider Him in any way fully human as you have Him. You have Him stumbling on the idea of creating humans!

dhw: Do you really think I’m stupid enough to regard as “fully human” an infinite, immaterial, almighty and eternal mind that has no source, and can create a universe and life? A God who experiments, gets new ideas, enjoys creating things is no more human than a kindly God who doesn’t want us to suffer, or who makes mistakes and tries hard to correct them. If you can give him human attributes, then so can I – and mine at least have the merit of logically explaining the great bush of pre-human life, which you try so hard to brush aside.

I never brush the huge bush aside. I've explained it is obviously required, both as as side effect of evolution branching in many directions and also for food supply for all.

DAVID (under “Independent and dependent life”): Parasites and viruses are not independent life, but some macrophages among the bacteriophages blur the lines:

DAVID: Amazing. These phage have stolen a bacterial defense mechanism CRISPR from bacteria. Every type of life has its own pathogens, even bacteria that attack us. More proof of the diversity of the living and the partially living.

dhw: It is indeed amazing, but in the light of our discussions I can’t help wondering why your God would have designed them as “part of the goal of evolving humans”.

DAVID: All part of necessary econiches.

dhw: Necessary for what? Do you think your God would have been incapable of directly designing H. sapiens plus food supply if he hadn’t designed these particular parasites and viruses?

Read today's entry about fighting bacteria and phages. Our gut biome has to kept under control and beneficial. Every part of the giant bush of life can be shown to have a purpose, from a purposeful God, whom you do not understand the way I do.

Under “Emperor penguin huddles”:

DAVID: Keeping warm by huddling is the Emperor's trick, and it follows a math pattern, but the birds don't do math, they constantly shift to find the warmest spot:

dhw: I thought you might want to attribute this strategy to your God, but you don’t, so I’ll leave it at that.

Cows seek shade under trees on their own as do our horses. Concrete common sense response to discomfort. Comes from previous experience. No conceptualizing involved. Trees are natural air conditioners. As a human I know that concept. All animals knows is recognizing comfort.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum