Theodicy: bad bacteria seen differently (Introduction)

by David Turell @, Friday, July 16, 2021, 19:35 (92 days ago) @ dhw

BACTERIAS’ ROLE IN HUMAN BIOMES

DAVID: Question raised in wrong. It is our human interpretation the bugs are bad. WE have decided in recent days we are the innocent bystanders in the other organisms battles.

dhw: We are not innocent bystanders in the battle between so-called good and bad, as we are probably the greatest creators of “bad” in the history of life. You keep missing the point. We agree that “good” and “bad” are human concepts, and relate only to what is good or bad for us. (What is good for the murderous bacterium is bad for us.) But theodicy asks why did a “good” God design what we regard as the “bad” bacterium (plus all the other “bads”) in the first place, knowing what suffering it would cause? My proposed answer: he did not design it. Just as according to you he designed humans so that they were free to create their own good and bad, he designed the mechanism whereby every life form pursues its own means of survival by changing its own structure and modes of behaviour to do what is “good” for it. If you insist that he did design the murderous bacterium, you are left with the same question as before: why would a “good” God knowingly design something he knew would cause suffering?

And my view is God knew we might accidently get in the way. He did not make them intentionally to be bad for us so our brains can solve the problems that arise.

DAVID: You have just fought my idea of God as designing everything. That is what a designer of reality does!!!

dhw: How many designers of reality (life) have you met? A God who designed intelligent cells which could then change their own structure and behaviour without his intervention (i.e. in a free-for-all) is still God the designer. […]

DAVID: How does evolution reach a specific goal with your free-for-all??? You must then accept humans appearance as entirely accidental. Adler and I think that view os entirely illogical.

dhw: It doesn’t, although your God can always dabble, as in the theory that he learns and/or gets new ideas as he goes along. But you (I can’t answer for Adler) assume that he started out with the one goal of producing humans plus lunch, and so you have no idea why he would have designed all the unconnected non-humans plus lunches beforehand. (You’ve always said that Adler does not touch on this subject.) That is “entirely illogical”. As for “accidental”, there is nothing “accidental” about speciation à la Shapiro, since intelligent beings are at work, constantly coming up with new ideas of increasing complexity. But that still does not make humans inevitable. It is pointless to take existing reality and then claim it must all have been planned from the start. We have absolutely no idea what would have happened if conditions had developed differently. But as things have turned out, yes, we can say that if God exists, the intelligence of humans could be a logical outcome of the process he set in motion, whereby intelligent beings gradually morph into more intelligent beings. The mystery in your theory is why, if your God only wanted sapiens, he had to go on specially designing all the life forms etc. that had no connection with sapiens. And you still cannot solve the problem of theodicy.

I cannot know why God chose to evolve us from bacteria. Ask Him. Perhaps He will answer you. My solution for theodicy is unchanged: God did not intend the bugs to be bad for us, as we have discussed. He knew it might accidently happen if we get accidently mixed into the battles, so He provided our big brain to fight back and solve issues


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum