Creation vs. Evolution

alwight · Feb 22, 2014

DFT_Dave said:
DNA determines what is suited for what and DNA is not the product of mindless unthinking nature.

--Dave

Then you're simply putting the cart before the horse imo with an un-falsifiable convenient conclusion only because it is a conclusion that must require a godly deliberate plan and design. Natural selection at least, has no part to play if the blueprints have already been drawn up and Goddidit.
Anything can be "explained" by supernatural means but if it is not scientifically explainable alone then natural laws of physics can all be disregarded.
If everything is already built into DNA supernaturally then natural answers are simply not worth the bother.

Hedshaker · Feb 22, 2014

DFT_Dave said:
Not all theists, so it seems you're a little weak on theology.

--Dave

I don't much care for theology or religion, tbh. Don't know about your neck of the woods but in Britain and Europe religion is clearly on the decline, which is good

Hedshaker · Feb 22, 2014

DFT_Dave said:
Yes, my faith is in a rational world view not irrational ones. There can only be one rational world view, rationally speaking.

--Dave

Again, so you believe. You seem to believe anything you say automatically becomes true by default.

Not exactly rational IMO, but if believing so helps, go for it.

DFT_Dave · Feb 22, 2014

gcthomas said:
Don't you have an interpretation then? Oh well.

We certainly have functional free will that allows for personal moral responsibility for our actions.

But if you think free will means thought is independent from the material of the brain, then the study of specific mind impairments resulting from defined brain injuries does not support that conclusion. Mind is simply a result of the operation of the brain and so absolute free will is probably an illusion. The illusion of free will is more important than the fact of it.

The question we all face is, does something else exist that is not matter? Is non-material spirit another aspect of reality?

Can we have thoughts and engage in activities of our own accord, with out force, coercion, or cause that is outside of our control?

That's not to say that we cannot ever be forced, coerced, or be caused to think or do something we may not do otherwise, but is there that which I can take personal responsibility for without saying my parents made me do it, the devil made me do it, or God made me do it.

From brain injury I could also say that my desires and the thoughts were not impaired but only my physical ability to communicate them.

If we are merely material beings under the law of cause and effect then we are certainly not free. If we are free in any sense then there exists something of our being that is not under the law of cause and effect and therefore not material.

--Dave

gcthomas · Feb 22, 2014

What evidence do you have Dave that we do indeed have the full free will you describe? The belief of having free will must be part of the illusion or we couldn't function as individuals or society. Even without complete free will it is important to act as if we do.

DFT_Dave · Feb 22, 2014

alwight said:
Then you're simply putting the cart before the horse imo with an un-falsifiable convenient conclusion only because it is a conclusion that must require a godly deliberate plan and design. Natural selection at least, has no part to play if the blueprints have already been drawn up and Goddidit.
Anything can be "explained" by supernatural means but if it is not scientifically explainable alone then natural laws of physics can all be disregarded.
If everything is already built into DNA supernaturally then natural answers are simply not worth the bother.

Laws of physics did not come from the mindless random movement of atoms. I say it better but you're catching on.

--Dave

DFT_Dave · Feb 22, 2014

Hedshaker said:
Again, so you believe. You seem to believe anything you say automatically becomes true by default.

Not exactly rational IMO, but if believing so helps, go for it.

How does anyone know what is true or not? How do you know?

If anyone wants to know where or how anything evil originates we have a very reliable saying, "follow the money".

As I have studied through the years to try and find out what is the origin of what is good and true, I have a saying, "follow the logic".

--Dave

DFT_Dave · Feb 22, 2014

gcthomas said:
What evidence do you have Dave that we do indeed have the full free will you describe? The belief of having free will must be part of the illusion or we couldn't function as individuals or society. Even without complete free will it is important to act as if we do.

That's very existentialist of you, perhaps you are more philosophical than you let on.

"Man is absurd but he must act as though he were not."--Sartre

"Man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving...his origin, his hopes and fears, his loves and beliefs are but the outcome of accidental colocation of atoms...no intensity of thought and feelings can preserve an individual beyond the grave...all the brightness of human genius are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system."--Bertrand Russell

Your only one strep away from the "illusion of self" and Nirvana.

But, if freedom is a reality then the atheist house of cards comes tumbling down, and the God who is free is the logical conclusion for our origin and what is eternal.

--Dave

gcthomas · Feb 22, 2014

So show that we have true soul based freedom! I know it is a nice comfortable thing to believe, but what evidence is there?

I am content with the illusion of free will.

noguru · Feb 22, 2014

Dave, I hate to break it to you but your claims are logically incoherent and not cohesive. I have pointed this out to you many times, yet you will not do the critical self analysis necessary. Good luck with you poorly thought out street preaching. May you snare many other idiots like yourself.

noguru · Feb 22, 2014

DFT_Dave said:
No, whatever is eternal and the cause of whatever is temporal must be free, freedom is movement.

So then you think eternal things can evolve?

DFT_Dave said:
Aristotle's timeless and immovable "Unmoved Mover", a.k.a., "pure actuality" is not free, nor is the timeless and immovable "Eternal Now".

I have no idea why you would say these things are "not free", can you elaborate (I mean other than placing the label "immovable" on them)?

DFT_Dave said:
Only a God who "freely actualizes his own infinite potentiality" can logically account for a universe that has a beginning. Infinite/unlimited potential works with infinite/unlimited time.

--Dave

These words sound all nice and flowery, but they seem to lack any substance based on empirical evidence. Could you enlighten me some more on your thought experiment here?

I still do not see how you get here from there.

Why is God necessary to logically account for the "freely actualized energy of the universe", and the vast amount of potential that exists in the universe?

MichaelCadry · Feb 23, 2014

Dear noguru,

Without God, there would be nothing! Don't you agree?

Michael

alwight · Feb 23, 2014

MichaelCadry said:
Dear noguru,

Without God, there would be nothing! Don't you agree?

Michael

You don't need an absolute certainty Michael, noguru will perhaps say "probably yes" while I say "probably no".

Hedshaker · Feb 23, 2014

DFT_Dave said:
How does anyone know what is true or not? How do you know?

If anyone wants to know where or how anything evil originates we have a very reliable saying, "follow the money".

As I have studied through the years to try and find out what is the origin of what is good and true, I have a saying, "follow the logic".

--Dave

Sure, so following the logic, we know snakes cannot talk (it's the larynx, see), clinically dead people don't come back to life (because they're, em, dead), virgins do not give birth (or at least, a male of the species needs to be involved), and there's no unquestionable evidence for magic.

Good for you Dave. Follow the logic where it leads, even when it doesn't comply with your cherished beliefs. Welcome to the sceptics club :up:

“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

alwight · Feb 23, 2014

DFT_Dave said:
Laws of physics did not come from the mindless random movement of atoms. I say it better but you're catching on.

--Dave

I don't suppose that you'd ever catch on that your opinions and assertions simply don't amount to anything if left unsupported by physical facts and reality?

noguru · Feb 23, 2014

MichaelCadry said:
Dear noguru,

Without God, there would be nothing! Don't you agree?

Michael

When I was agnostic I did not look at the world around me and say "Without God all this could not be." My faith did not come from a desire to explain all that is around me. It came from a desire to find something more from this whole process, and the feeling I get when I achieve/achieved that peace of understanding. I use both the present and the past tense because for me it is an ongoing process, one of progress rather than having achieved perfection. Kind of like peeling back the layers of an onion. I do not even believe we can achieve perfection, except in the sense of a healthy balance.

I'm a dweller on the threshold
As I cross the burning ground
Let me go down to the water
Watch the great illusion drown

I'm a dweller on the threshold
And I'm waiting at the door
And I'm standing in the darkness
I don't want to wait no more

I'm gonna turn and face the music
The music of the spheres
Lift me up consume my darkness
When the midnight disappears

This is a description of a useful process, not a goal that has some ultimate end.

Because if it did end, then what are we to do?

DFT_Dave · Feb 23, 2014

gcthomas said:
So show that we have true soul based freedom! I know it is a nice comfortable thing to believe, but what evidence is there?

I am content with the illusion of free will.

Let's look at this propositionally.

The soul, if it exists, is not made up of atoms/matter.

True free will comes from a soul, not atoms/matter.

If there is no soul there is no free will, only the illusion of it.

I am responsible for my thoughts and actions if I have a free will.

I am not responsible for my thoughts and actions if I have no free will, I have been programed.

If no one is responsible for their thoughts and actions then what or who is?

What is justice if there is no true personal responsibility for one's thoughts and actions?

How does society prevent anarchy if no one can be held responsible for what they think and how they act?

Who will control society?
http://www.haciendapub.com/articles/critique-psychologist-b-f-skinner’s-beyond-freedom-and-dignity

--Dave

DFT_Dave · Feb 23, 2014

Hedshaker said:
Sure, so following the logic, we know snakes cannot talk (it's the larynx, see), clinically dead people don't come back to life (because they're, em, dead), virgins do not give birth (or at least, a male of the species needs to be involved), and there's no unquestionable evidence for magic.

Good for you Dave. Follow the logic where it leads, even when it doesn't comply with your cherished beliefs. Welcome to the sceptics club :up:

“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

What is or is not a fact very often is a matter of opinion.

Statements, whether considered true or false, that make a single point are neither logical nor illogical.

Examples: God exists. The universe evolved. God does not exist. The universe did not evolve.

It takes the relationship of more then one statement to determine what is or is not logical as in math.

1+1=2 is a logical construction. 1+1=3 is an illogical construction

One unicorn plus one unicorn equals two unicorns is a logical construction regardless if unicorns exist or not.

If there is no God then a virgin cannot give birth, is a logical statement.

If there is a God then a virgin can give birth, is also a logical statement.

If there is no God then a virgin can give birth, is an illogical statement.

God encoded DNA, is a logical statement.

Mindless matter encoded itself, is an illogical statement.

--Dave

DFT_Dave · Feb 23, 2014

noguru said:
So then you think eternal things can evolve?

I have no idea why you would say these things are "not free", can you elaborate (I mean other than placing the label "immovable" on them)?

These words sound all nice and flowery, but they seem to lack any substance based on empirical evidence. Could you enlighten me some more on your thought experiment here?

I still do not see how you get here from there.

Why is God necessary to logically account for the "freely actualized energy of the universe", and the vast amount of potential that exists in the universe?

Mindless energy has no intelligence or "free will", which is what "God freely actualizes" means.

You constantly violate the first law of rational thought/logic, the law of identity or definition. You like to change the meaning of the words I use to mean something other then what I am intending and then accuse me of being "logically incoherent and not cohesive".

"So then you think eternal things can evolve", is a good example. Movement as freedom of though does not mean the evolution of mind from where thoughts originate. Random movement of thoughts do not evolve into a mind because without a mind thoughts cannot exist.

--Dave

DFT_Dave · Feb 23, 2014

alwight said:
I don't suppose that you'd ever catch on that your opinions and assertions simply don't amount to anything if left unsupported by physical facts and reality?

I don't suppose that you'd ever catch on that your opinions and assertions simply are not physical and not reality.

--Dave

Creation vs. Evolution

New member

New member

New member

LIFETIME MEMBER

New member

LIFETIME MEMBER

LIFETIME MEMBER

LIFETIME MEMBER

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

LIFETIME MEMBER

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

LIFETIME MEMBER

LIFETIME MEMBER

LIFETIME MEMBER

LIFETIME MEMBER