Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell , Saturday, January 28, 2023, 18:27 (454 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Your distortions of the ideas I present result in denigrations of my point of view. Survival depends on luck is Raup's point. So Raup is telling us God designs well, and God surpasses the bad luck, because in my view, He can design around it.

If survival depends on luck, and God surpasses the bad luck, how can you say there is no luck involved? You have also told us your God did not control such environmental changes as forest to desert. Your belief that he is always able to design species that will survive under conditions he has not created still leaves him dependent on luck to provide the conditions under which he can design humans plus food, which you claim were his one and only aim from the beginning. And it still leaves you with your belief that 99% of the species that he designed were mistakes.

99% failure is part of our evolutionary system, as Raup states. Your statement about luck is totally inconsistent. No luck is involved if God can design for any set of requirements.

dhw: In the above I have dealt solely with YOUR concept of God! If he exists, then of course he does what he wants. That is why it makes perfect sense to assume that he WANTED the history of life with its vast variety of comings and goings, and it makes no sense at all to assume that he wanted to make mistakes and conduct failed experiments.'

I fully agree. God knew exactly what He was doing and what He wanted to do. He knew and expected species would disappear allowing Him to design the next steps in evolution.

DAVID: What is evolution but steps of success following steps of failure (or serious bad luck).

dhw: Thank you for acknowledging the bad luck you refused to acknowledge above. Why have you suddenly left your all-powerful God and his one and only purpose out of your argument? I keep offering you logical theistic explanations - such as a succession of new ideas, or a free for all - for the comings and goings, and also experimentation. You initially rejected the latter, but in your new theory you now support experimentation, and have added your own variation by insisting that 99% of your God’s experiments were mistakes and failures.

Explained above. Failure equals non-survival, which is neccessary for evolution to advance under God's designs.

dhw: Let’s rephrase the question: why are you so afraid of the idea that your God might in his own way enjoy creating his wonders? He does!!! In His own way, allegorically per Adler.

dhw: Why are you so sure that he reasoned to himself: “In order to create what I wanner create, I gotta make millions of mistakes and conduct millions of failed experiments”? Why is this more “reasonable” than him thinking: “I sure do like the idea of creating lots of different living things, and it’ll be mighty interesting to see how my idea develops”?

DAVID: Again, you want God to be a playwright like you have been, creating life by letting His imagination drift along. I know of no theist who would accept this view.

dhw: It’s akin to Whitehead’s process theology: “God is in the process of becoming…God in his consequent nature prehends the temporal world…and in this growing and changing nature, experiences the process, knowing and loving it. […] God works like an artist attempting to win order and beauty out of opportunity.” (Oxford Dictionary of World Religions)

dhw: All ignored. I wonder how many theists believe 99% of God’s work consisted of mistakes and failed experiments, and his success depended on luck providing him with survivors and conditions that he could use to achieve is one and only purpose.

I know from the past you had a favorable view of Whitehead. I'm not impressed with his theory and haven't noted much support. Once again you cannot accept the idea, clearly presented previously, an all-powerful designer doesn't need special circumstances/conditions to provide a suitable design.

DAVID: God ended with an Earth full of successful organisms. Despite mistaken starts and stops. Success by a method that is not straight forward. Only God could do it that way.

dhw: Dinosaurs ruled the world for about 150 million years, but apparently 99% of them (only birds survived) were a mistake and a failed experiment. We’ve ruled the world for a few thousand years (and what a mess we’re making of it), so let’s wait a few more million years before we say it all “ended” with successful organisms.

Meanwhile, thank you for confirming yet again that you believe your God made mistakes. And I suggest you rephrase your last sentence: you believe that your God could only do it that way. And you prefer to ignore the possibility that what you call your God’s mistakes were in fact precisely what he wanted to design. (Discussion prolonged on “more miscellany thread”.)

I've previously made the point that perhaps evolution was the only available method that would work. And another rephrase is necessary: God used a system that produced mistakes. God did not make any mistakes, Himself.