Miscellany (General)

by David Turell , Saturday, February 13, 2021, 19:13 (1161 days ago) @ dhw

Spiders lasso

DAVID: None of us know that answer. Theology is filled with guesses.

dhw: So what logic makes you sure he did not create life (including humans) in order to have something to be interested in? And why are you so insistent that he had a purpose, but then so scared of telling us what you think that purpose might have been?

The purpose is production of humans, as previously stated. My view of God is that He is too purposeful to create something for His own self-interest. Do you think He gets bored?

Fin to limb genes

DAVID: You've again ignored necessary food supply

dhw: For the thousandth time, ALL forms of life are part of the food supply for other forms of life, but that does not mean they were all part of the goal of evolving humans. Please stop dodging.

No dodge. You forget or ignore our evolution is one continuing process from simple to complex

DAVID: I have said I'll wait to condemn bad bugs, which may turn out to have good purpose.

dhw: So what was the point in your raising the question in the first place if you are not prepared to offer an answer and yet dismiss a possible answer even though you agree that it is logical?

Some subjects are presented for completeness without answers known. Why not?>

EGNOR ON FREE WILL

DAVID: I like Egnor's reasoning. You have a different approach I do not accept as a proper form of dualism as I view it.

dhw: Sometimes I wonder if you even read my posts! February 9:

EGNOR: Sensitive states are sensation, perception, imagination, memory, and sensitive appetites (emotions), among others. These are tightly linked to matter and may be considered material powers. Human beings also have rational mental states, which are the powers of the intellect and the will. These abstract powers are immaterial — they are not caused by matter — and thus the will is not determined by the brain.

dhw: His approach is all about dualism versus materialism. Has he never heard of the cause-and-effect argument against free will? Namely, that every decision we take is influenced by factors beyond our control – not just the brain but our whole genetic makeup, our upbringing, our environment, chance events etc. We have dealt with this subject over and over again, and belief in free will depends on what the will is supposed to be free from. The above makes the case against the concept.

I needed your repetition to properly answer point for point. The 'beyond our control' is totally fallacious. I have full right to chose among the influences in my past and discard them. Raised liberal I am now a very conservative libertarian. You are correct, free will involves what you make yourself free from, and environment, chance events, previous easily discarded upbringing never should influence an individual decision in that moment of thought. Freedom from most of the past in very possible.

Highest speed claw snapping

dhw: Yet again, you refuse to answer my question. I’ll restate it in even more radical terms: Do you think an unknown, sourceless, intelligent being created a special programme for claw-snapping 3.8 billion years ago, or popped in to perform a claw-snapping operation on a few pre-claw-snappers, and did so as part of his goal to evolve humans and their food supply?

dhw: I don’t know often you want me to repeat the three explanations I have offered for cellular intelligence, but here they are again: your God, chance, some form of panpsychism. But I find all three equally unconvincing. Our discussion, however, centres on Chapter 2 of life, which concerns how evolution progresses, not how it originated. Hence the question which I have asked and which you have not answered.

You know my expected answer. God is the designer of life and evolution. History is a clear picture of how He did it by design.