More Miscellany (General)

by dhw, Thursday, April 25, 2024, 12:54 (9 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: I will agree faith is not rational.

dhw: Thank you. I will make a note of this for the next time you claim that your theories about evolution and God’s purpose, method and nature are based on reason.

DAVID Stop complaining that I made logical choices in thought that lead to faith.

dhw: You have just agreed that your faith in your choices (apart from the design theory) is irrational (i.e. not logical).

DAVID: The thoughts are logical. The final leap is not.

That depends on which of your choices we’re talking about. The thought that an omniscient, omnipotent God would deliberately choose to design and cull 99.9 out of 100 species that had no connection with his one and only goal is illogical/irrational, as is your fixed faith in that theory.

A new consciousness declaration

QUOTE:“The empirical evidence indicates at least a realistic possibility of conscious experience in all vertebrates (including all reptiles,amphibians and fishes) and many invertebrates (including, at minimum, cephalopod mollusks, decapod crustaceans and insects.)(dhw's bold)

DAVID: there is no question animals are aware, perform purposeful activities and also can play. What they lack, as my bold notes, is self-awareness.

dhw: The whole point is that they can think for themselves, which suggests that they can design their own lifestyles, strategies and modes of survival. What else would they use their consciousness for? I would also draw attention to “including, at minimum….”

DAVID: But consciousness does not create speciation. […]

dhw: I thought we'd agreed that it does, unless you believe in blind chance. But you think that only your God’s consciousness can do it, and it is unthinkable that even though he gave consciousness to our fellow animals, birds and insects, he might have done the same for
single cells and their communities.

DAVID: Consciousness is more common than previously realized.

dhw: I’m glad the message is gradually getting through to you.

DAVID: But not at your cell committee theoretical level.

“Community” not “committee”. Thank you for publishing all the articles that disagree with you.

Bioluminescence

DAVID: light is always helpful, but these organisms don't have eyes. It is a mystery but developments in evolution always have reasons.

I agree, and one very logical reason is that in one way or another they improve chances of survival. It seems to me highly unlikely that the reason for bioluminescence is that your God (if he exists) considered it to be essential for the evolution of humans and their food, although you tell us that we and our food were his one and only purpose right from the beginning of life.

Importance of Microbiomes: skin wound effects

DAVID: These relationships are hard to explain as to purpose. But evolution produces these results for valid reasons. We need to understand the underlying purpose.

Not so hard to understand if we assume that bacteria, like every other organism, find their own ways to survive. This can clearly involve conflict between different types of bacteria in the great free-for-all – a theory which you accept when it concerns good and bad bugs, but reject when it comes to the countless different species that had no connection with your version of your God’s one and only purpose (us and our food).