Miscellany (General)

by dhw, Tuesday, December 22, 2020, 10:48 (1223 days ago) @ David Turell

Fine tuning
DAVID: I'm not sure He is interested. Just probably

dhw: Here are some quotes: “I’m sure He sees what is going on with His own level of interest, unknown to us.” “I certainly think he is interested in His creations, but not as entertainment.” “I’m sure He likes what He creates, and that He is satisfied in His results as the inventor.” But it makes no difference. Even “probably” supports the feasibility of the theory, as it does with your next false accusation.

dhw: You also believe that he probably has thought patterns and emotions similar to ours.

DAVID: Again, only the use of logic. Stop the distortions

QUOTE: “He and we probably have similar thought patterns and emotions beyond just simple logical thought.”

DAVID: My comment is a nebulous guess. We cannot know, so theory support is very thin

I have not distorted anything, and your comments are not nebulous – they are explicit. But of course nobody even knows whether God exists, let alone what he is like. What unites you and me is our interest in the various possibilities.

DAVID: Same silly complaint, with you thinking God shouldn't have done it the way He did.

dhw: Same silly distortion, when you know perfectly well that I’m questioning your version of the way he did it, and you have no idea why he would have done it the way you think he did it. And you still haven’t told me why my proposal is illogical.

DAVID: My view of God is He creates history, therefore He evolved us from initial bacteria. Logical.

Yes, that is logical. For the thousandth time, what is not logical is your belief that your God individually designed every life form, econiche, strategy and natural wonder extant and extinct as “part of the goal of evolving humans”, even though 99% of them had no connection with humans. You have admitted that you have no idea why he would have used such a method, you reject all alternative methods, and we agreed to leave it at that. So please stop all this backpedalling.

Egnor’s latest
DAVID: Same silly complaint. God chooses to do as He wishes

dhw: Of course he does – and you have no idea why he would have chosen to do it your way, but you reject all my theistic alternatives on silly grounds of “humanizing”, although you agree that they are perfectly logical.

DAVID: Only logical with an imagined humanized God.

And there is nothing wrong with that according to your own belief that he probably has thought patterns etc. similar to ours.

Chimps ‘r’ not us
dhw: I asked if YOU thought ants had souls.

DAVID: I follow Jewish thought. If they accept ants, I do.

dhw: A most unusual approach: You believe what you’re told, although you don’t know what you’ve been told. Anyway, I always thought you preferred to think for yourself rather than accept the teachings of the established religions.

DAVID: I accepted animal souls long ago. One of the few points.

Why do you have to study Jewish doctrines before you decide what you believe about ant souls?

Strange quark stars may exist
DAVID: Again you are clinging to pure Darwinism that there is a real drive for survival. I accept it as a reasonable but unproven theory, and doubt strongly it is a factor in speciation.

And:

DAVID: Survival of the fittest is just an observation, proving nothing.

dhw: “Survival of the fittest” is the result of the process (natural selection), and that is not the point of the argument, which is that trying to improve chances of survival in ever changing conditions is the CAUSE that drives evolutionary change. Thank you again for agreeing that this theory is reasonable.

DAVID: The only drive is a resulting adaptation within species. No proof it drives evolution.

For the umpteenth time, it is a theory. Nobody has proof. But since we know for a fact that organisms change themselves in order to improve their chances of survival in new conditions, the logic of the theory cannot be faulted.

Our galaxy has ancient clusters:
DAVID I can't answer your weird inference as to why the universe is so big. God has His reasons. […]

dhw: Not an inference but a question, and why “weird” since you believe your God’s sole purpose in designing the whole universe was to create us humans? You can’t answer […]

DAVID: No need to know an answer. God creates and evolves as He sees necessary to reach His goal, us. We eventually discover the answer to most questions.

There is no “need” to know the answer to any of the fundamental questions we discuss on this forum. But if someone proposes a theory, we discuss it. Your non-answer reminds me of Dawkins, who adopts the same attitude: “If there is something that appears to lie beyond the natural world as it is now imperfectly understood, we hope eventually to understand it and embrace it within the natural.” Elsewhere, he says atheists not have faith! Only the much maligned agnostic (Darwin was one of us) seems able to view both sides of the argument!