Back to theodicy and David's theories (The nature of a \'Creator\')

by David Turell @, Sunday, January 31, 2021, 18:32 (259 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: I admit I have not solved the problem of theodicy, but it is your approach to maximize the minimal error rate to denigrate God.

dhw: There is no denigration of God in my proposal of a free-for-all, just as there is no denigration of God in the concept of free will for humans. If humans do bad things, we do not blame God. If bacteria do bad things, you are lost: you can’t understand why he designed them, but you hope that one day someone will come up with a nice explanation. I’ve given you one, and you can find no fault in its logic.

I see you logic as weakening God as purposeful. Only we critical humans find faults in God's works. That criticism may well be wrong, against God's knowledge.


Protein folding creates life

DAVID: The point I'm raising is that without this folding process life cannot exist, based on the biochemistry we know. God had to create this roulette game of chance knowing that molecules must be allowed to fold on their own to achieve the speed needed. He was able to create a great many good editing systems, but those systems rely on the same protein folding process, so errors are at times maintained but somehow the errors are insignificant enough that we humans were successfully evolved from bacteria. dhw ignores all of this. Perhaps it is from the lack of understanding the biochemistry of life.

dhw: For the umpteenth time, it was you who raised the subject of errors, and now all you want to do is forget about them and focus on what went right. Diabetes, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and motor neurone disease may be “insignificant” to you, but even you had your God trying and failing to find a cure! In any case, the bad things of life are not confined to errors in the system you believe your God designed. You have again omitted to mention all the other “bad” things you think he designed – like bacteria and viruses, and apparently environmental disasters too. The problem of theodicy is not confined to errors in protein folding.

I had to honestly raise the issue. it exists. Most bacteria and viruses are helpful. But you prefer to not remember!


[..]

DAVID: Back we go to your weird God who has to create interesting things for Him to watch. God is obviously interested in all He creates.

dhw: So if he is interested and he created what he is interested in, why is it “weird” to suggest that he created them because he wanted to create something he could be interested in?

A God who needs 'interests' is a humanized God. You never see that .


Asian weather patterns

DAVID: It is our study of the history of evolution that leads thoughtful folks to recognize how unexplained we are, and therefore unexpected.

dhw: Unexplained yes. You have not told us who didn’t expect us, and you have not told us why whoever it was expected trilobites, dinosaurs and duckbilled platypuses. Yes, we are uniquely gifted. No, we are not the only unexplained creatures on Earth.

Unexplained is not unexpected as you twist meanings. You know Adler's point and mine is simply there is no reason we appeared. We cannot identify a need based on any evolutionary theory dependent upon simple survivability.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum