Return to David's theory of evolution PARTS 1 & 2 (Evolution)

by dhw, Tuesday, March 08, 2022, 09:14 (786 days ago) @ David Turell

Dhw: […] the puppet show is an image for your God’s human desire to have complete control, whereas a free-for-all allows for your God’s human desire to create something more interesting for himself to watch.

DAVID: Once again you describe a humanized god who needs to entertain himself. Again you made my point.

You keep using the words “need” and “entertain”, which make your God seem needy and superficial. I prefer to use the terms you yourself have used: he enjoys creating and is interested in what he creates. And in one of my theories (akin to your own analogy of playwriting), I suggest that it is far more interesting to create something unpredictable and surprising than something that merely obeys instructions.

DAVID: A God who can invent a universe and then add life is no slouch who must experiment or learn by experience.

dhw: I didn’t say he “must”, but I object to your assumption that he is incapable of experimenting, learning, and creating things that will interest him, although you are certain that he enjoys creating and is interested in what he creates.

DAVID: I never used the words 'I am certain' in regard to my God. I have always said my thoughts are guesses at what He might be thinking.

This discussion has been going on for years, and I base my arguments on what you write. I have learned to keep a record of certain key statements, because you frequently deny having made them or claim that I have misinterpreted them. I’m sorry if this seems sneaky, but it is frustrating when we reach common ground and then you run away from it. You do the same with your statements about your God’s possible thought patterns, emotions and logic, and the irrelevance of past species and foods to current life. The dates are when I first responded to the quote:

“Back to theodicy and David’s theories”: March 7 2021: “Thank you for your long review clarifying past discussions. I’m sure God enjoys his work at creating.” Followed on 9 March by: “God is in the business of creation and enjoys doing it or I think he would stop.”
“Theodicy”: October 19 2020: “I’m sure he sees what is going on with His own level of interest, unknown to us.”

Of course you are right – all our theories are “guesswork”, including that of God’s existence, but even if you only guess that God enjoys creating and is interested in his creations, you are providing a logical “humanized” motive for his creating life.

DAVID: As for God's use of an evolutionary method you are are splitter and I'm a lumper. That is a deep personal proclivity. Part 0f why you are an agnostic.

dhw: A complete red herring. We can see evolution as a continuous process of different life forms coming and going, all of them descended from the first cells (lumping). At the same time, we can recognize that those life forms are divergent, and one branch of the bush is totally different from another branch and will eat different foods (splitting). What you try to do is lump all branches together as part of the one and only goal of producing humans and their food. You know it doesn’t make sense, you tell me to ask God to explain it, and yet you go on dodging the issue with one vague generalization after another.

DAVID: My statements are quite specific. You just have proven my point as in the bold, again splitting. My psychoanalysis is on the mark which is why you are uncomfortable with it.. It is your lone discomfort that makes no sense only to you.

The bold shows that you try to use lumping as a diversion from the fact that you have agreed that extinct life has no role to play in current life, and there is no direct connection between most extinct life forms plus foods and ourselves. I am not merely “uncomfortable” with it – I am pointing out that you yourself have no idea why your God would have created all these diverse life forms that have no connection with humans, if his one and only goal was to design humans.

dhw: A simple request: Please tell me if Behe and the rest believe that every single extinct life form and food (plus econiche, lifestyle and natural wonder) was individually designed by God as “preparation” for humans and their food, and was part of God’s one and only goal of evolving humans and their food.

DAVID: Without direct questioning, it is my impression they agree with me. God designed all of evolution to create/ produce humans. They would all agree with Adler.

Adler, you keep admitting, does not cover the illogical elements of your theory. Over the years, I have consulted lots of ID websites, and I have never once come across anything like your theory – on the contrary, every effort is made to avoid mention of God and of specific divine purposes. But even if this vague “impression” of yours were to be correct, it really doesn’t matter two hoots, because if you can’t find a logical explanation why your purposeful, all-powerful God fulfilled his one and only purpose by initially not fulfilling his one and only purpose, I don’t suppose even ID-ers can.