Miscellany (General)

by dhw, Thursday, September 02, 2021, 12:18 (968 days ago) @ David Turell

Part One

dhw: “Do you mean that your God planted instructions on how to create each new antibody for each new future threat? Or do you mean that he [God] gave our cells the ABILITY to recognize each new threat and to respond to it by creating new antibodies de novo without him having to intervene”?

DAVID: You’ve got it!!! The latter portion of your comment is exactly what God did!

dhw: Not the first option, which was following instructions, but the second option, which was an autonomous ability. As I mentioned earlier, this form of "volte face" has become a regular feature of our discussions, as in the threads on time and evolution.

DAVID: You know full well my constant position is cells follow God's instructions to do their work. The 'ability' you cited and I praised includes the understanding of the instructions. Cells don't think. And with the instructions to be followed God does not have to intervene any further.

And so you accepted the first “portion” after all (God gave instructions), and the ABILITY to recognize and respond without your God’s intervention actually meant the ability to follow God’s instructions, which apparently do not count as an intervention. Your use of language really takes some getting used to. We can drop the subject for the time being. I have now understood that when you say autonomy, you mean following instructions.

New amphibious whale
DAVID: What I agree to in the past involved your general view of evolution from the standpoint of a very humanized God who had no clear view of any specific goal and preferred free-for-alls and experimenting, nothing more.

dhw: You often accuse me of twisting your statements. I have repeatedly told you that in all my alternative theistic theories, my God has a specific goal: the free-for-all is to create an unpredictable and ever changing world which he can watch with interest; experimenting allows for your own goal of producing a life form that will in some ways “mimic” him.

DAVID: No change from your very humanized form of a God.

For the non-argument of “humanization”, see “Theodicy”. You told me that my alternative theories presented a God with no specific goal. That was a misrepresentation of my views. I trust you will now withdraw it.

dhw: I would suggest that if your God exists, he is perfectly capable of giving cells the autonomous ability to change their own structures in order to adapt to or exploit new conditions. This is no less “fantastic” than your 3.8-billion-year-old computer programme for every single evolutionary change, or the theory that your God pops in to perform all the necessary operations for every single evolutionary change, and to issue instructions for every single problem.

DAVID: Your theory of God-given cell intelligence involves much more complex design than straight design by the designer himself, especially if a desired endpoint (humans) is present. But I know you have no idea why we are here. You just accept it without reason.

I have no idea what your first sentence means. Why could your God not have “straightly” designed the intelligence of cells? And why do you think he was incapable of making them intelligent enough to form all the combinations that have resulted in all the different life forms, including humans? Why are you trying to limit the powers of your all-powerful God? As for “you have no idea why we are here”, do please tell us. In the past you have suggested that he wanted us to recognize and admire his work, and perhaps to have a relationship with us. Nice and human. I’ve suggested that maybe he created all life forms because he enjoys creating and watching his creations, and a free-for-all is more interesting than a puppet show, and the human free-for-all is the most interesting one to watch. But you dismiss the theory because my human proposal is somehow more human than your human proposal. Anyway, do please give us your other reasons for why we are here.