Return to David's theory of evolution PARTS 1 & 2 (Evolution)

by David Turell , Saturday, February 26, 2022, 15:48 (795 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: 'One and only purpose' is your overemphasized version of my views. Adler relies on humans as an endpoint. Nothing wrong with it. All the other organisms are steps in evolution and food supply for all.

dhw: All the other organisms that were not connected with humans were obviously steps in evolution if you believe in evolution, and obviously all organisms require and provide food. If, for the second time, you now definitively agree that NOT all past life forms, foods, econiches, lifestyles, solutions, natural wonders etc. were “in preparation for humans” and were “part of the goal of evolving humans” or, in other words, were your God’s one and only purpose, then we can end this discussion.

Of course we arrived from a specific line of a single branch, but all the branches that surround us provide the food. I am using the giant bush process of evolution as a whole.

DAVID: Name your god's goals

dhw: I have named them umpteen times! ...
1) To enjoy creation and to provide interesting things to watch.
2) To set in motion an unpredictable process which he does not control and which will be more interesting to watch than one he controls (free-for-all).
3) Your constantly repeated one and only goal, which you have now twice renounced: experimenting in order to create a being that might resemble himself and form a relationship with him. (You have inadvertently accepted experimentation under “biggest bacterium”.)
4) In the course of 1), constantly coming up with new ideas, and eventually hitting on 3) which becomes a new goal, as opposed to being the one and only goal from the beginning.

Counter: 1)& 2) God does not need interesting things to watch. Humans need that.
3) God does not need experimentation to reach His endpoint purposes. (I did allow the minor point that the biggest bacterium was a possible side attempt to try)
4) God has all the desires to create He needs from the beginning. He doesn't come up with new ideas. Only humans do that.

Conclusion: You have made God totally human, as usual.

DAVID: Substituting your self-God version of writing control does not answer my objection to your views of your God-imagination process. My God view is well known. He works toward His established goals.

dhw: It was you who tried to draw an analogy between my writing process and your God’s creative process. If he exists, then of course he works towards his established goals, but nobody knows what they are. The analogy, however, fits perfectly if his “established goals” are to enjoy what he is creating – as I do- and if he gets enjoyment from setting the creative process in motion and then allowing it to follow its own course instead of trying to push it in a predetermined direction.

I was discussing only design method! You've added your human needs and again applied them to God, again making my humanizing point..

dhw: It was you who tried to draw the analogy! It’s not my fault if you got it wrong! What in your eyes is the solution/purpose of all the extinct life forms etc. that had no connection with us, and who has the authority to recognize it?

DAVID: Adler.

dhw: You have left out the purpose. According to you, Adler is concerned with proving your God’s existence and does NOT cover your illogical theory of evolution. Besides, when did Adler acquire the authority to tell the rest of us what we must “recognize”?

DAVID: Adler specifically uses God's evolution of humans to prove God exists.

dhw: As bolded above, and I’m not surprised that he doesn’t cover your illogical theory, since you regard him as a logical thinker.

Please do remember, Adler accepted evolution as God's method to reach humans. He never discussed how God did it, as beside the point. I am the one who separately is trying to explain the nitty-gritty of how God did it. Explained in the past

DAVID: The history of evolution is the same for all of us, except for you who splits it into unrelated segments.

dhw: Evolution is split into unrelated branches, and the vast majority of these had no connection with humans. Hence the absurdity of claiming that they were all “in preparation for humans “ and were all “part of the goal of evolving humans”, unless of course you now opt for theory (3) above.

I have accepted paragraph two above as stated, and continue to view all of evolution as one whole giant process..