The Human Body Could not have Evolved

[udx]

 

 

I am saying that God is the explanation.  He is the reason the world remains in a general state of order and uniformity.   God is the best explanation for why animals have the ability to adapt to different climates and conditions.   It is evidence of His design.

 

I don't know if you realize this but most species have died out on this planet if you look at the historical (fossil) record.   That doesn't bode well for your argument.   

 

 

Not true.  It makes a lot more sense for extinction to be part of a divine plan than for it to be random and arbitrary.  The Universe is based on order; extinction doesn't fit the bill unless directed by an intelligence.

 

This is a view a priori that there is a divine plan to start with. With that view you can argue anything to fit into that framework. Not that I don't support there is a divine plan, but one must look at the evidence and interpret conclusion from it, not to mold all the evidence around a conclusion/idea.

 

We can argue with the same type of logic saying that a Universe based on order should not have extinction because extinction removes information from the eco-system a type of disorder. You do not need intelligent direction to cause specie extinction, it is an irreversible direction that we are facing from the order to disorder view. 

[Serving]

Lewontin :

 

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,

 

in spite of its failure to fulfil many of its extravagant promises of health and life,

 

in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories,

 

because we have a prior commitment,

 

a commitment to materialism.

 

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world,

 

but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes

 

to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that

 

produce material explanations,

 

no matter how counter-intuitive,

 

no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.

 

Moreover, that materialism is an absolute,

 

for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

 

 

Talk about a loaded dice  .. "to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations"

 

Hmmm.

 

 

 

[Bonky]

Not true.  It makes a lot more sense for extinction to be part of a divine plan than for it to be random and arbitrary.  The Universe is based on order; extinction doesn't fit the bill unless directed by an intelligence.

Volcanic activity doesn't make sense w/o a divine being? Death was a part of God's divine plan? I always thought Christians were opposed to that kind of idea.

[Bonky]

Lewontin :

 

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,

 

in spite of its failure to fulfil many of its extravagant promises of health and life,

 

in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories,

 

because we have a prior commitment,

 

a commitment to materialism.

 

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world,

 

but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes

 

to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that

 

produce material explanations,

 

no matter how counter-intuitive,

 

no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.

 

Moreover, that materialism is an absolute,

 

for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

 

 

Talk about a loaded dice  .. "to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations"

 

Hmmm.

Historically when you look at material explanations vs. supernatural; the material explanations are blowing away the supernatural ones. It's worked out [materialism] pretty well so far. Let me know when there one single good supernatural explanation for anything.

[Guest]

Volcanic activity doesn't make sense w/o a divine being?

 

~

 

Sense

 

And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground. Genesis 4:10

 

And Sensibility

 

For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. Romans 8:22

[BoddhiBody]

Lewontin :

 

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,

 

in spite of its failure to fulfil many of its extravagant promises of health and life,

 

in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories,

 

because we have a prior commitment,

 

a commitment to materialism.

 

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world,

 

but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes

 

to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that

 

produce material explanations,

 

no matter how counter-intuitive,

 

no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.

 

Moreover, that materialism is an absolute,

 

for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

 

 

Talk about a loaded dice  .. "to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations"

 

Hmmm.

 To look at everything that exists, that is the material, physical, energetic state of all the universe, which is space-time and its parts and facets; energy and motion; gravity and forces; is inherently to look at all the "stuff" of our existence. Throughout that study, we glean evidence from physical and natural conditions and bases, then form systems and conclusions based on that evidence.

 

You can't create logical systems from illogical premises. We look at the chemicals and forces and phenomena that make up our universe and we deduce from them logical conclusions and systems that work. And a system's "workability" is proof of its validity. One plus one equals two; E=MC2; gravity causes masses of things to be drawn towards objects of larger mass; genes precede physical characteristics. None of it requires anything other than itself; it does not require something supernatural and in fact we have no evidence of anything such. Supernatural notions are superfluous to existence in any purely logical paradigm of thought. Supernaturalism is surplus. There's absolutely no evidence for the supernatural at all.

 

Your problem is that logic is not sufficient for you. You look at the raindrops and you ask what existential purpose they have, whereas I look at the raindrops and know that the antecedent factors that led to their becoming are as far as reason will actually take me. Anything beyond that is pure speculation. "What existential meaning has it in a world created just for me" is a reprehensibly silly question. It is like asking "what emotion is a cloud?"

 

The issue, really, is that the universe, from all logical deduction, is utterly indifferent to both you and I, and that scares you. Surely, I know more than most that self-realization is a cruel price to pay for an upper hand over the apes, but here is my thought on this: If the universe is oblivious to me, which it is, then it has never offered me existential purpose. Never has, and it never will. And that makes it all the more important that I forge my own purpose from it. If I concede that I mean nothing to the universe, then the people on this planet become everything to me.

 

You say that we, atheists, evolutionary scientists, have a prior commitment to materialism. We're immoral little creatures and surely I imagine that you think you are the moral cure. No, that is not true. What is true is this: Every single "thing" that we observe, see and deduce from, is a "thing" in a material sense. It is impossible for any observable, deductable thing to be immaterial. How can you deduce something from a thing that is not? Everything that IS, IS. And "materialism" in a scientific sense is just that.

 

I have from logic, forged a reasonable motivation to help this planet, a reason for compassion. How can that be? It is because, in the end, your purpose is not cosmic, nor is it from some exterior force, nor is mine. It is self-driven and self--determined just as all of our's are.

 

Your horse neighs and if I could speak horse I'm sure it would be saying "I am not as tall a horse as you think I am. Unsaddle me".

Edited April 24, 2015 by BoddhiBody

[Guest Teditis]

Define Supernatural, please?

[Bonky]

Define Supernatural, please?

While we're at it, let's define entities that supposedly exist in the "supernatural". I'll be you the conversation never gets off the ground, people scurrying about trying to describe that which they have little or no evidence for.

[Guest Teditis]

a poor dodge and evade...

[BoddhiBody]

Define Supernatural, please?

Beyond the laws of nature; outside existence.

 

"supernatural" is the biggest, fattest, silliest oxymoron in the English dictionary.

Edited April 24, 2015 by BoddhiBody