Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Thursday, August 25, 2022, 11:13 (616 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Our difference is about food supply. I view the entire bush of life as vital to feed us in this huge population we've grown into.

dhw: Once again you are talking about the present! There is no point in my repeating our "difference", as now bolded [below], which you continue to dodge.

DAVID: It is not a dodge. The present comes from the ongoing evolutionary past. Stop slicing up evolution!

Of course the present comes from the past! But that does not mean that every single life form and food of the past was preparation for and led to H. sapiens and our present food, though you claim that we and our food were your God’s one and only purpose! Please stop hiding behind vague generalisations!

DAVID: As an outsider to belief, try to understand God by assuming everything that happens is under His direct control for His reasons.

dhw: Please stop pretending that my criticisms of your illogical theories, and the logical alternatives I offer, are invalid because I am an agnostic. You do not have any more knowledge of the “truth” than I do. Of course if he exists he has his reasons for doing what he has done. Your theories make no sense to you. […]

DAVID: Once again, stop accusing me of nonsense. My theories are perfectly logical to me, if not to you, as your now bolded statement shows.

dhw: My bolded statement agrees that he has his reasons. I keep asking you to explain your theories, such as the one bolded above, but you can’t, and your answer is that they “make sense only to God”. That can only mean that they do not make sense to you!

DAVID: I accept God's historical works in our recorded history. My analyses then try to understand why God did it that way. They make sense to me. if not to you.

You may try to analyse why he would have fulfilled his one and only purpose by designing countless life forms and foods that had no connection with his purpose, but you cannot find a single reason, and therefore you tell us that your theories “make sense only to God”, i.e. not to you. Please stop dodging.

DAVID: God does not need self-gratifying results of His creations.

dhw: My personal view would be that (if he exists) he doesn’t “need” them – I don’t imagine him thinking he’d be miserable without them. I am simply following up on your own certainty that he enjoys creating and is interested in his creations, and I propose that in that case, it is feasible that he creates things because he wants to enjoy the occupation of creating and wants to create things that will interest him. Just a theory, but perfectly logical, don’t you think?

DAVID: No, He is not that human. He doesn't create out of self-interest.

How do you know? In any case, "self-interest" means you only care about yourself, and that is very different from creating things you enjoy creating and find interesting. We may want to have children because we like the idea of parenthood, but that doesn’t mean we only care about ourselves. If your God is loving, maybe he created life because he liked the idea of having something to love. Would you dismiss that as “self-interest”?

dhw: I keep pointing out all the possible “human” attributes you ascribe to your God […]

DAVID: Of course, God has some human like attributes but they don't drive His purposes.

dhw: How can you possibly know that?

DAVID: We can only observe what God does, anything more is pure conjecture, and we've done plenty of that.

dhw: Correct. So please stop assuming that your illogical conjectures must be true and none of my logical alternatives can possibly be true because you are a believer and I am an agnostic.

DAVID: You refuse to accept my reasoning that all of the past leads to the giant current bush of food supply. What you are constantly doing is separating the past from now!!!

Once more, please stop hiding behind vague generalizations. Yes, the past leads to the present, and we and our food have evolved from past life forms and foods. But you admit yourself that “ALL” of the past (i.e. the vast majority of extinct life forms and bushes) does NOT lead to the current bush of food supply. And so you continue to dodge the insoluble problem bolded at the start of this post.

dhw: I have no idea what gives you the right to assume that my theories are “false assumptions” when nobody can possibly know the truth about your God’s personality (if he exists).

DAVID: I have every right to disagree with your designed personality of God.

Of course you do, just as I have every right to disagree with your own “designed” personality of God. However, you actually agree with me that your God wouldn’t create if he didn’t enjoy creating, and you are equally certain that he is interested in his creations. And so I find it incomprehensible that you should consider it impossible that he might create BECAUSE he enjoys creating and BECAUSE he wants to create things he will find interesting.