Miscellaneous (General)

by dhw, Tuesday, December 03, 2024, 09:41 (22 hours, 6 minutes ago) @ David Turell

Negative theology

I'm afraid some of this goes over the same ground as the "evolution" thread, but perhaps the repetition will make the arguments clearer.

DAVID: Natural evolution could not have produced us. We are designed to be here.

dhw: According to you, every life form was designed to be here, although 99% of them had no connection with us. Why else would you label your God’s use of evolution as inefficient?

DAVID: Wrong! All of evolution was required as you twist Raup's statements. All the 0.1% surviving required the 99.9% extinct to get here.

We needn’t go back over your ridiculous distortion of Raup, which argued that the 0.1% were the children of the 99.9%. It is you who insist that your God designed every species and then had to cull 99.9 % of them because they had no connection with the purpose you impose on him. That is why you ridicule him as being “inefficient”.

dhw: […] Looking at your list, I’d say that we can be certain that IF God exists, he is not a human being. (Negative.) I would say that if his motive for creating us was to be recognized and worshipped, or he enjoys creating and is interested in his creations(positive), that is feasible, but then it is not feasible to say he’s selfless.

DAVID: God's selflessness means He expects no self-interest gains from His creations.

dhw: I know what “selflessness” means. I don’t know how you can apply the term to a God who you think enjoys creating, is interested in his creations, and may have created us because he wanted us to recognize and worship him.

DAVID: My wishes for a God relationship does not mean God wishes as I do.

The desire for a relationship, recognition and worship was one of the reasons you gave for God specially creating humans. Of course we don’t know God’s wishes, and can only theorize, but you don’t have to pretend that your theoretical answers are not your theoretical answers.

DAVID: A God who creates without self-interest is perfectly feasible.

dhw: So please once and for all tell us why you think he created life in general and us in particular.

DAVID: It is obvious, I have no way of knowing.

Nobody has. And you have no way of knowing his purpose, but you insist that you do. And there must be a reason or purpose for his wanting to create us, and you have kindly offered us a whole list of (very feasible) possibilities, which you now attribute to me and would like to reject while agreeing that they are all possible!

Cellular intelligence: renal cell memory

dhw: [..] I would suggest that cell behaviour only looks automatic when cells are performing their routine duties. Intelligence comes into play when something new is required.

DAVID: As I've noted renal cells and liver cells must be able to alter their routines as circumstances require to maintain the proper balances.

dhw: Thank you for repeating the point I have just made. They have the ability to change when required. That requires intelligence.

DAVID: Or following intelligent instructions.

dhw: If they are able to alter their routines as circumstances require, it means they have the ability to do so. Having an ability does not mean having to follow instructions.

DAVID: Yes it does if they use instructions to alter their actions.

Interesting argument. Then let’s try a different approach. Do they have the ability to disobey your God's instructions?

Stoicism

DAVID: without the support of religion what do you do? This interview tells us face life with a stiff upper lip. DHW should tell us how he does it.

dhw: I gave you a full answer to your personal question, in the hope that you would understand why religion is NOT fundamental to stoicism or to virtue.

DAVID: 'You sound like a virtuous guy. I think I am also.

dhw: I have no doubt that you are, and I can assure you that I also do my very best to stick to the principles I listed. They do not require the support of religion, and you may be surprised to know that I have agnostic and atheist friends who are also very decent people.

DAVID: I would think so.

So now you know. It is perfectly possible to be stoical and virtuous without the support of religion, which was our starting point.