Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Monday, January 23, 2023, 12:29 (456 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: God chose a difficult system and made it work. If He simply had us and our ecosystems appear in a flash, you would accept that as better? I am trying to interpret the history we have to work with. I'm honestly describing the problems with living evolution as a creative process, and you get all bent out of shape, because you think it makes God look stupid. God successfully used a tough to handle system and made it work. I'd say God is brilliant used that way.

According to you, your God as first cause CREATED (why “chose”?) a system which forced him into 99% mistakes and failures before achieving his one and only goal (us and our food). And that apparently is “brilliant”. Your interpretation of the history we both have to work with is an insult to a God who, in the same breath, you tell us is all-powerful.

dhw: [...]In two of my alternatives, a) his experiments are successful and he continues to develop them in his quest to create a being like himself (plus food), or (b) he gets new ideas as he goes along. No failures, no bumbling. You dismiss them because you say they humanise him. […] Why is it less “human” to achieve a goal despite lack of control of conditions, and despite countless mess-ups, mistakes and failed experiments, than it is to achieve a goal without making any mistakes or conducting any failed experiments? […]

DAVID: […] So the dead ends simply were not dead ends?
And:
DAVID: God successfully created us and our necessary ecosystems using a messy system and not in full control of environment.

Once again you dodge my question. But I will answer yours. It depends which of my theories you are talking about. If his purpose was to create a being like himself, the 99% were dead ends, but they were successes in themselves. God’s attitude would have been: “Yep, I love them thar brontosauruses, but I reckon I can do even better…” New ideas have no dead ends, just an onward flow of inspiration, and they need not be inhibited by a rigidly fixed ending (see below on the creative process). In a free-for-all, there are no dead ends either, because there is no fixed purpose other than the joy of discovery: what amazing things his invention can come up with. Now please answer my bolded question!

DAVID: Purposeful free-for-alls??? Who keeps a purposeful direction in the process? Having new ideas as He goes along is a great description of bumbling!

See above re free-for-alls. Re new ideas, you have no understanding of the creative process. Many artists, composers, writers begin simply with one idea and it is part of the fascinating process to see what this will lead to. (I speak from experience.) Even in your own theory, you have your eternal God suddenly creating this universe and life. Wasn’t that in itself a new idea? You have him then making mistake after mistake. Was every mistake and failure meticulously planned, even though according to you he even had to adjust his creativity to conditions over which he had no control? Now please answer my bolded question.

DAVID: Were we evolved? YES.

dhw: Yes. And so were the 99% of what your regard as failures and mistakes, because you insist that your God designed them all individually for the sole purpose of designing us and our food.

DAVID: In so doing God created a huge bush of life a our food supply.

But 99% of the “bushes” he created had no connection with our food supply, and you call them mistakes/failed experiments.

DAVID: In this discussion is God in charge? YES.

dhw: Yes, in all three of my theistic theories, he does what he wants to do. In your theory, no, he depends on conditions outside his control, which force him to design life forms that have nothing to do with his purpose.

DAVID: Again, forgetting humans need food, a definite purpose.

Again trying to dodge the fact that 99% of his bushes were mistakes.

DAVID: Conclusion: an all-powerful God chose to use this system. We don't know His reasons, but probably it is the best system available, in His judgement.

dhw: You are saying that an all-powerful God chose to invent a system part of which he could not control, and which led him to design 99% of life forms that were mistakes and failures. And this is more godlike than a God who does exactly what he wants to do.

DAVID: God did exactly what He wanted to do, using the method He wanted to use, all decided before He made the universe.

GOD: “I only wanna create David Turell and his breakfast, so I’m gonna deliberately create millions of useless critters that ain’t got nothin’ to do with him an’ his breakfast, so he can tell the world that all my mistakes an’ failed experiments prove how clever I was ter create him an’ his breakfast.”

(Apologies if that makes him sound like the bumbling fool you take him for.)