Post reply

Reply to the message by dhw

Name:

E-mail: (optional, won't be displayed directly)

Leave this field empty:

Homepage: (optional)

Leave this field empty:

Location: (optional)

Remember me (cookie)

Category:

Subject:

Formatting help

skip to input

format text bold: [b]bold text[/b]
format text italic: [i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink: [link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color: [color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size: [size=small]small text[/size]; [size=large]large text[/size]
insert list: [list][*]list item[/list]
insert image: [img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]

:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(

Message:

> dhw: [i][b]Until humans arrived, the prime motivation for all activity would have been survival, and the quest for survival means that all organisms must adapt to or exploit their respective environments, constantly finding new forms of nourishment, accommodation, hunting, self-defence etc. That in turn requires intelligence, whether the intelligence is autonomous (my proposal) or controlled by your God (your proposal)[/b]. Please explain why you reject this explanation of evolutionary advancement.[/i]
> 
> dhw: [i]My point, of course, was to emphasize the role played by the environment as a crucial factor in the advancement of evolution. I’m pleased to see that you accept this.[/i]
> 
> DAVID: [i]That I said I know what you wrote is not acceptance. Environment relates to adaptations, without any proof it causes speciation.[/i]
> 
> dhw: [i]I asked you why you rejected my bolded explanation of evolutionary advancement. Your reply was not a reply, and even now the only objection you have raised is that there is no proof. There is no proof for ANY of the theories we discuss. A couple of days ago, you wrote:”Absolute proof, which you always require, does not exist. Choice involves reason with evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.” Please pinpoint whatever section of my bold seems to you to be unreasonable.[/i]
> 
> DAVID: [i]What I object to is your theory that autonomous intelligence can exist for no particular reason. Intelligence must have source, cannot appear simply from nothing, cannot arrive by chance in any form. Rocks are not intelligent; Earth started as a big rock, nothing more and now it contains life. There must be a designing mind. We agree on everything except the source of intelligence, which we both agree is absolutely required for life to exist. I name the mind God.[/i]
> 
> So you do not object to my explanation of evolutionary advancement, which was the purpose of my post. I even went out of my way to emphasize that this explanation applied whether one believed in autonomous intelligence or in control by your God.  Thank you for accepting it. Your objection is a complete non sequitur. I have not claimed that autonomous intelligence can exist for no particular reason – and I don’t know why you have switched the focus from the manner in which evolution proceeds to the existence of God. Your statement “intelligence must have source, cannot appear simply from nothing” is at one and the same time an excellent argument for design and a bad argument for God, which is one reason for my agnosticism.