Afterlife: Pinker's skeptical thought (Endings)

by David Turell @, Saturday, June 06, 2020, 15:32 (1392 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Invoking a god you do not believe in doesn't help your lonely theory. How do you explain the origin of enzymes? Chance?

dhw: Cellular intelligence is not my lonely theory. Why do you continue to pretend that Margulis, McClintock, Buehler, Shapiro and Co. never existed? Why do you continue to conflate the theory of cellular intelligence with the unanswered question of origins? We don’t know the origin of consciousness, so does that mean consciousness does not exist? Why are you so terrified of the idea that your God might not have dabbled or programmed every single life form, econiche, strategy, natural wonder in the history of life? Just tell us why a God-made cellular intelligence is more of a fairy tale than God preprogramming or dabbling every new complexity in life?

DAVID: You always ignore is that cellular intelligence is only an appearance from the outside of cells. When we go inside all we see is automatic molecular activity at very, very high speed, all the reactions highly coordinated. Always looks very intelligently organized and designed to me.

dhw: When you look inside a human being, all you will see is automatic molecular activity. You can’t SEE intelligence! You can only identify it through behaviour. You claimed that my theory was “lonely”. It is not (see above). You have always acknowledged that it has a 50/50 chance of being correct. So once more, please tell us why it is more of a fairy tale than your God preprogramming or dabbling every new complexity in life.

What is acting as the man behind the screen as in Wizard of Oz? The instructions the cell follows in its genome. My personal odds are 100%


dhw: You are very good at attacking the faiths you do not accept, but for some reason you remain blind to the problems with your own. However, I'd prefer not to attack your faith, or that of your adversaries. To each his own. I am simply explaining why I can't share it.

DAVID: I know that, but cannot understand the choice.

dhw: That puts you exactly on a par with the atheists.

DAVID: Yes, they don't understand your agnosticism, you should be atheistic.

dhw: You don’t understand it either and think I should be theistic! Why can’t any of you just accept that not everyone is able to share your faith in the unknowable?

I can't accept the complexity of the biology of life I fully understand without a designer.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum