David's theory of evolution Part Two (Evolution)

by David Turell , Tuesday, March 24, 2020, 19:03 (1493 days ago) @ dhw

David: You don't seem to read what I answer to you. The first bold shows how you distinctly worry about a delay, when God knows what He wants to do in my theory. That is direct implication God should not be impatient as you view it in my theory.

dhw: God knows what he wants to do in all the theories I have offered you! And you agree that they are all logical and fit in with the history of life.

I've agreed they are logical if considering a humanized God. Don't misuse my comment as you debate.

dhw: I do not worry about a delay – I worry about a theory which insists that there was a delay and which cannot supply a single logical reason for it.

The delay is obvious in the historical record. It exists! Your comment doesn't fit reality.

dhw: I have supplied a logical reason: experimentation, but you reject that because your personal concept of God is that he “can do anything he wants in any way he wants”, and experimenting would be “humanizing”, although your God probably thinks like humans!

Another distortion. God is logical like we are, nothing more. We cannot know His underlying reasons for his choices of action.

dhw: I have also offered the theory that God didn’t think of humans until late on in the history. No “delay”, but a logical explanation for the 3.X billion years he spent designing other life forms (or letting other life forms design themselves).

Another version of your humanized God using your human thoughts applied to your human version of God.

DAVID: I simply accept the history as showing what He did over time. Why must you insist I explain that which I do not try to explain? I can think of possible reasons for time delays, which would be pure guesswork. You guess, as you seem to want to. I won't, as it proves nothing.

dhw: The history does not show that humans were his purpose from the start, that he could fulfil his purpose any way he chose, that he specially designed every single life form, econiche, natural wonder etc, or that he did so in order to cover the time before he started specially designing pre-humans and humans! Your view that there was an inexplicable delay is only caused by the combination of these highly subjective interpretations of the history.

History itself only tells us history. But there is philosophical thought about history. The book 'The Difference of Man and the Difference It Makes' is a most powerful argument for humans as God's purpose. Why don't you read it? It is constantly republished.

dhw: You wrote: “Logic is as logic does. My background does not allow your logic about biochemistry, and all the ID’ers agree with me.” May I take it that your background now allows my logic about biochemistry, and it does not in any way run contrary to what ID-ers believe? (But see our exchange under "Revisiting language" to restore the agnostic balance.

DAVID: You supply the agnostic balance. I don't. You have recognized the extreme complexity of the biochemistry of life as extremely strong evidence for design, but you avoid choosing a designer who must exist, as as true agnostic. The debate will continue!

dhw: Fine, except that I reject the word “must”. I have explained why the design argument is balanced by the equally unbelievable “evolution of intelligence” argument. And I take it that my logic about biochemistry fits in with your own logic and does not run contrary to what ID-ers believe.

You are correct. So where did the intelligence which must exist come from?