Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Choosing a faith
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 2356 of 3694 (910614)
04-28-2023 7:20 PM
Reply to: Message 2350 by PaulK
04-28-2023 5:09 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
PaulK writes:
Then maybe you shouldn’t use the idea that it was cellular in your arguments.
Why not? So what if there were microbes that pre-date cellular life? Our lives are based on cellular life.
PaulK writes:
There is no plausible explanation based on intelligence as the cause. No known intelligence that could have caused it. No evidence that an intelligence is needed. No plausible motive for the presumed intelligence to create life in that way.
I continue to maintain that sentient life with an awareness of right and wrong is far more plausible to have emanated from an intelligent source than a mindless source. Of course that isn't scientific but it goes beyond what science can examine or test, regardless of how many processes it is able to research.
PaulK writes:
Oh, it is not without evidence. The existence of tribalism is a fact. That humans can consider distant people who they have never met to be part of “us” is a fact. The benefits from members of a group helping each other is a fact.
Tribalism is a fact and how often do we see a tribe fighting to gain an advantage over another tribe. Tribalism is the worst example that you could have come up with to explain altruism. If one tribe wants to fight against the tribe next door then I wonder how you can extrapolate that into an explanation of why people want to help a far distant tribe.
PaulK writes:
After more than ten years and you still don’t understood the concept of the “selfish gene”. You’re wrong. And wilfully wrong. If you cared about the truth you would have set yourself right by now - not that you had any excuse for getting it so wrong in the first place.
Here is the best site that I could find on the selfish gene. I admit it has been a number of years since I read the book. Selfish Gene theory and altruism
Now explain to me what I'm getting wrong.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2350 by PaulK, posted 04-28-2023 5:09 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2360 by AZPaul3, posted 04-28-2023 9:00 PM GDR has replied
 Message 2361 by PaulK, posted 04-29-2023 2:15 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 2357 of 3694 (910615)
04-28-2023 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 2354 by Tangle
04-28-2023 7:04 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
Tangle writes:
Because we know the mechanism! Mutations are chance occurrences
Sure, but that doesn't explain why the possibility of those chance occurrences exist at all. Also, I'm not sure that I would even categorize them by chance. Darwin's finches beaks evolved due to differing physical circumstances. As I say, evolution is an incredible process that has the earmarks of design all over it.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2354 by Tangle, posted 04-28-2023 7:04 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2358 by Tanypteryx, posted 04-28-2023 7:57 PM GDR has not replied
 Message 2359 by AZPaul3, posted 04-28-2023 8:26 PM GDR has replied
 Message 2362 by Tangle, posted 04-29-2023 3:18 AM GDR has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 4344
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.8


Message 2358 of 3694 (910616)
04-28-2023 7:57 PM
Reply to: Message 2357 by GDR
04-28-2023 7:24 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
Darwin's finches beaks evolved due to differing physical circumstances.
That was selection. The variation was already in the population due to random mutations.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2357 by GDR, posted 04-28-2023 7:24 PM GDR has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2359 of 3694 (910618)
04-28-2023 8:26 PM
Reply to: Message 2357 by GDR
04-28-2023 7:24 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
Sure, but that doesn't explain why the possibility of those chance occurrences exist at all.
Are you really asking 'why' there is a 'possibility' of an electron potential spike that breaks a molecular bond when it gets hit by a stray gamma-ray? Are you asking 'why' the gamma-ray has the 'possibility' for such energy to zap the electron so hard as to break the bond in a DNA strand? Are you asking 'why' the gamma-ray has a 'possibility' it was there in that place at that time to cause a mutation?
Do you know what you are asking? I don't.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2357 by GDR, posted 04-28-2023 7:24 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2367 by GDR, posted 05-01-2023 5:06 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 2360 of 3694 (910619)
04-28-2023 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 2356 by GDR
04-28-2023 7:20 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
Of course that isn't scientific but it goes beyond what science can examine or test, regardless of how many processes it is able to research.
We call that intransigence. And you’re wrong, science knows it well.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2356 by GDR, posted 04-28-2023 7:20 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2368 by GDR, posted 05-01-2023 5:07 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 2361 of 3694 (910620)
04-29-2023 2:15 AM
Reply to: Message 2356 by GDR
04-28-2023 7:20 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
quote:
Why not?
Honesty, for a start. If you don’t know it to be a fact, why treat it as one?
quote:
So what if there were microbes that pre-date cellular life? Our lives are based on cellular life.
And to you, that means that cellular life was the first life and couldn’t have evolved from something simpler? Does it?
quote:
I continue to maintain that sentient life with an awareness of right and wrong is far more plausible to have emanated from an intelligent source than a mindless source. Of course that isn't scientific but it goes beyond what science can examine or test, regardless of how many processes it is able to research.

And I will point out that that is just an unsupported opinion that you are desperate to believe. Science cannot disprove it - because it is utterly unfalsifiable. You can always assume some undetectable impulse from an undetectable entity was involved in some undetectable way. But that is hardly a rational basis for belief.
quote:
Tribalism is a fact and how often do we see a tribe fighting to gain an advantage over another tribe. Tribalism is the worst example that you could have come up with to explain altruism.
On the contrary it is a very good way. It is also a fact that the “tribes” are quite malleable. In which case all that is needed is for a person to see others as “us” to want to help them. Making excuses without understanding is not the business of someone who cares about the truth. But it is what you do. And that is why you are so often wrong - just as you are here,
quote:
Now explain to me what I'm getting wrong.
It is no use linking to sites or even reading them if you can”t be bothered to understand them. And you obviously do not understand the idea at all.
quote:
However Darwinism is again about survival of the fittest and looking out for the us when it benefits the self.
That is exactly contrary to the idea of selfish genes. Benefit to the self is only relevant insofar as it benefits the copies of our genes we carry. And that can be and is overridden by benefits to other copies. Even the earlier idea of kin selection gets past mere benefits to the self.
It might be more accurately phrased is “Darwinism is about successful replicators and looking out for the “us” when it tends to benefit copies of our genes, directly or indirectly - even to the severe detriment or death of the self. Feedback effects have complicated the picture considerably and any valid analysis of a situation must take those complications into account.”

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2356 by GDR, posted 04-28-2023 7:20 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2373 by GDR, posted 05-04-2023 6:31 PM PaulK has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 2362 of 3694 (910621)
04-29-2023 3:18 AM
Reply to: Message 2357 by GDR
04-28-2023 7:24 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
GDR writes:
Sure, but that doesn't explain why the possibility of those chance occurrences exist at all.
They happen because life is faulty. Mutations occur when DNA replicates, mistakes are made and not always repaired correctly. DNA is very easily damaged by radiation and chemicals. These mistakes and external damage is totally natural und unpredictable.
Also, I'm not sure that I would even categorize them by chance. Darwin's finches beaks evolved due to differing physical circumstances.
This is what happens when you combine motivated thinking (“I have a belief so I need to made the facts I observe fit that belief”) with a partial understanding of the subject you're talking about.
It's evolution 101 that it requires two independent events
1. A random mutation in the germ line.
2. The selection of a beneficial mutation.
Darwin's finches grew different sized beaks because random mutations that determined beak size many millions of years ago created an advantage when something changed randomly in the environment - such as a drought. Had the random mutation not occurred at the time of the random climate event the advatage it gave would not have been selected for.
It's very much more complicated than that but that's the core concept.
I say, evolution is an incredible process that has the earmarks of design all over it.
And I say that that is a fantastic example of motivated thinking by a religious person that has no formal training in what he's commenting on.
I mean really, get a grip, you're not this stupid. The ToE is an accepted fact by the world's scientists, it is NOT a guided or designed process. There isn't the slightest indication of design. No designer requiring a particular outcome would build in a random process that GUARANTEES that any particular outcomes can't be predicted.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2357 by GDR, posted 04-28-2023 7:24 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2374 by GDR, posted 05-04-2023 7:47 PM Tangle has replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 2363 of 3694 (910637)
05-01-2023 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 2353 by GDR
04-28-2023 6:52 PM


Re: Why not how
GDR writes:
I agree that my belief that we exist because of an intelligent first cause is subjective, but so is the belief that we exist strictly from processes that have only a mindless first cause. I also agree that all you will get out of the bag are your green circles which of course eliminates any philosophical thought or evidence.
It sounds like you don't understand the difference between "all there is" and "all we've been able to identify so far." One is honest - and the other makes claims that we're unable to know.
No one knows what's in the bag, so you don't get to say such a thing about us only being able to get green circles.
Magic could have existed. Perhaps we pull a yellow star from the bag.
But we investigated... nothing but green circles.
Dinosaurs could have existed. And they did. More green circles.
People living to 300+ years old could have existed. Perhaps we pull a purple moon from the bag.
But we investigated... nothing but green circles.
God can exist - we could see a red square. Just haven't seen one yet.
We see many people draw red squares, and claim they've pulled one. But each one turns out to be a fake.
With nothing but green circles so far. Yes - it is beyond 'subjective' to think the next question will result in a red square. But it isn't subjective at all to think the next question will result in another green circle. That's just following the pattern. I think you do understand this - you're just trying to say anything at all to make it sound more "even" when we both know it's not.
The rock rolls down the hill as a result of an exterior cause. It might be a quake, a shifting in the earth, a shove etc and on top of that gravity. What's your point?
My point is that the answer to "why did the rock roll down the hill?" can be "a quake, a shifting in the earth, a shove etc and on top of that gravity" - which are all green circles.
However, we all come to our own unevidenced belief as to whether we exist from mindless processes or from processes set in motion by an intelligence.
After millions and millions and millions of questions being answered with nothing but green circles.
It is most definitely an evidenced reasoning to hypothesize that the next question will also be answered with another green circle.
To call such a thing an "unevidenced belief" is beyond silly. It's leaning into being willfully ignorant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2353 by GDR, posted 04-28-2023 6:52 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2383 by GDR, posted 05-08-2023 2:04 PM Stile has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 2364 of 3694 (910641)
05-01-2023 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 2355 by AZPaul3
04-28-2023 7:05 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
AZPaul3 writes:
Design or natural processes? Majik or chemistry?

We have reason to hypothesize that the ‘design’ argument leaves different marks on the universe then natural processes. The interactions of particles and energy gradients is very well understood. We can see quite deep into the workings, the ebb and flow of energy, in this universe. There does not appear to be anything but what is naturally expected on both the largest and smallest cosmic scales.

If there were a designer it’s work is indistinguishable from nature. Spinoza?

But you go beyond just ‘designer’. You want to go to gods. You want to say the very operations of nature, the operations we have modeled, the equations we consider ‘laws of nature’ are god determined, god driven and so intervening and mucking about and covering it up is child’s (god’s) play.

I still can’t see where that differs any from the natural we already know. This universe appears just as it coulda/shoulda/woulda if all there is, is nature. There is no reason, no need, to suppose such a god thing. The god meme has no reason to exist. It doesn’t do anything.

You want to see spooky consciously deliberate actions and influences in its workings. But nature appears to be only capable of being nature and doing natural things. It may be spooky seen in ignorance but nature doesn’t do consciously deliberate spooky things.
I largely agree with that. However, that assumes that we can't form conclusions from anything other than scientific evidence. John Polkinghorne was a world leading acclaimed physicist and a committed Christian. Francis Collins a world leading and acclaimed biologist is also a Christian. He called DNA the language of God, That doesn't prove anything except that theism, and even Christianity, isn't anywhere close to solely the domain of the intellectually challenged.
You present theories of how we formed consciousness, morality, a sense of beauty and a desire to explore the world and even the universe. In my view that all of this could be the result of nothing but mindless processes on their own, without at the very least an intelligent initiator is nuts. It is simple as that and that it seems is where we stand.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2355 by AZPaul3, posted 04-28-2023 7:05 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2365 by PaulK, posted 05-01-2023 4:54 PM GDR has not replied
 Message 2366 by AZPaul3, posted 05-01-2023 5:01 PM GDR has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 2365 of 3694 (910642)
05-01-2023 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 2364 by GDR
05-01-2023 4:49 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
I am not AZPaul3. Please get your attributions correct.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2364 by GDR, posted 05-01-2023 4:49 PM GDR has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


(2)
Message 2366 of 3694 (910643)
05-01-2023 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 2364 by GDR
05-01-2023 4:49 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
In my view that all of this could be the result of nothing but mindless processes on their own, without at the very least an intelligent initiator is nuts.
Personal incredulity. It means nothing. It has not force with reality.
The only evidence available is overwhelming. There are only natural process at work in this universe. Any contention to the contrary is without evidence or reason and is emotional fantasy.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2364 by GDR, posted 05-01-2023 4:49 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2385 by GDR, posted 05-08-2023 5:23 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 2367 of 3694 (910644)
05-01-2023 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 2359 by AZPaul3
04-28-2023 8:26 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
AZPaul3 writes:
Are you really asking 'why' there is a 'possibility' of an electron potential spike that breaks a molecular bond when it gets hit by a stray gamma-ray? Are you asking 'why' the gamma-ray has the 'possibility' for such energy to zap the electron so hard as to break the bond in a DNA strand? Are you asking 'why' the gamma-ray has a 'possibility' it was there in that place at that time to cause a mutation?
I am talking about the formation of conscious life.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2359 by AZPaul3, posted 04-28-2023 8:26 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2369 by AZPaul3, posted 05-01-2023 5:28 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 2368 of 3694 (910645)
05-01-2023 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 2360 by AZPaul3
04-28-2023 9:00 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
[qs-AZPaul3]We call that intransigence. And you’re wrong, science knows it well.[/qs]
..and so you claim. I disagree.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2360 by AZPaul3, posted 04-28-2023 9:00 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2370 by AZPaul3, posted 05-01-2023 5:41 PM GDR has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 2369 of 3694 (910646)
05-01-2023 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 2367 by GDR
05-01-2023 5:06 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
I am talking about the formation of conscious life.
Maybe so, but Tangles message you were responding to in your Message 2357 was about mutations. You seem to think such mutations need some reason to occur. The mutation itself is quite random and doesn't need any reason for its possibilities.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2367 by GDR, posted 05-01-2023 5:06 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2371 by GDR, posted 05-04-2023 6:14 PM AZPaul3 has replied
 Message 2386 by GDR, posted 05-08-2023 5:26 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 2370 of 3694 (910647)
05-01-2023 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 2368 by GDR
05-01-2023 5:07 PM


Re: What's Important enough?
..and so you claim. I disagree.
Can't disagree with fact.
When you insist the evidence isn't there and continue to seek out fanciful reasoning to explain what is already known, that is intransigence. And, yes, science knows intransigence well because religionists, like yourself, exhibit it so frequently.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2368 by GDR, posted 05-01-2023 5:07 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 2372 by GDR, posted 05-04-2023 6:17 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024