Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell , Monday, January 08, 2024, 16:25 (318 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: If interest and enjoyment are driving forces for creation, they are a need. The conjectures you present are all reasonable as to why we were created. Also, all may be wrong.
And:
DAVID: I am trying to help you see how you humanize your God.

dhw: Of course – all theories, including that of your God’s existence, might be wrong, but why do you think your own reasonable theories listed above are less “needy” and less “human” than the theory of enjoyment and interest – of which you once wrote that you were certain?

Please note what I have bolded. You had no answer.

99.9% v 0.1%

DAVID: 99.9% are the area of my imaginary triangle. My triangle is my image of the bush of life. Humans are a tiny percent of the 0.1%.

dhw: Since when was a triangle the same as a bush? A bush branches out. The branches don't join up once they grow away from the roots! Yes, humans are a tiny percent of the 0.1%, because the 0.1% constitute all the extant species. The 99.9% constitute all the life forms that did not evolve into the extant species. You have agreed. Why are you now trying to disagree?

I'm not disagreeing. My triangle resembles a bush shape, and is simply another way to view it conceptually.

Newly found bacterial weapon

dhw: It is your belief that intelligent single cells lose their intelligence when they form communities, except when they combine into an immune system. Do you believe your all-powerful God was incapable of designing cells that could design their own adaptations and innovations?

DAVID: God could have done that if He wished. He obviously had reasons not to, because there is no evidence.

dhw: There is no evidence that 3.8 billion years ago your God compiled a list of instructions for every innovation, lifestyle, strategy etc. in life’s history, or that he popped in to perform ad hoc operations or issue instructions. Try again.

Don't need to. Explain the design you see that keeps you agnostic.

DAVID: The immune system is fully automatic.

dhw: There seems to be no end to your talent for disagreeing with yourself.
Dec. 22:
DAVID: The immune system is designed for a specific purpose, fight any infection that comes along. Only the immune system has this 'brain' that you wish for in other cells.

Dec. 28
dhw: We know that single-celled organisms have an autonomous system, and immune cells have an autonomous system, but until new conditions result in new species, we have no evidence that cells or God himself (if he exists) have done the designing.

DAVID: Agreed.

You have the ability to go back take comments out of context. The immune system follows DNA instructions to automatically make new antibodies as necessary.

Theodicy
DAVID: Note Godel tells us God must be considered as perfect in every aspect. […]

dhw: […] It’s no use you telling me that you’ve read a book which says God is perfect if you can’t respond to arguments that suggest God is not perfect (whatever “perfect” may mean).

DAVID: A non-answer. What guides you? I have given answers in theodicy summarizing the literature's responses. You can't accept those answers, but I do.

dhw: We had agreed to drop this subject, but now you want to go over all the same arguments again! If God is perfect but is the all-powerful, all-knowing first cause of everything, he must knowingly and deliberately have created evil. Does your definition of perfection include the deliberate and knowing creation of evil?
If you prefer to drop the subject, which we have already discussed ad nauseam, please let’s do so.

You have been given the answers theodicy offers. You don't accept them. End of story.