Well I saw the other thread for evidence for a designer and decided I would counter with this. I assume this topic has been addressed in the past and more than likely is played out, but I am new here and I always like to see peoples perspective on it.

Since science is fairly universal on the support for evolution I would like to see a more philosophical discussion.

My basic argument would be that evolution exists, god exists, so therefore evolution is a means of creation via god.

But assumming that God is a benevolent and omnipotent entity etcetera, why would he develop a means of creation that relies upon a dispassionate, even cruel, system of competition?

My argument would be:

The existence of God is unverifiable, ergo so is any influence he may have on the temporal world.
Evolution is a temporal phenomenon.
Consequently evolution can be considered as free from divine influence.

Well dispassionate, even cruel, system of competition is your opinion not a fact. Where you see cruelty I see a perfect system of adaptation that helps organisms to survive in a dynamic world.

As for God you cannot prove or disprove Gods existence so belief is merely a choice. For me the idea of an afterlife is logically better then the idea of rotting in a grave. So I believe it to be logical to believe in God.

If you choose to believe both then you must marry them in some fashion.

I see no conflict between the idea of evolution and an eternal spirit.

On the contrary, if spirit truly is eternal I would imagine it would try all sorts of different things to keep from being bored to death.

What would spirit do in a 'perfect world'?

If it always existed in a perfect world it would have nothing to do. How could it possibly have anything to do? If there was anything that needed to be done, the world wouldn't be perfect. If there was anything it didn't already know or couldn't do the world wouldn't be perfect.

It couldn't possibly 'strive' to accomplish anything in a perfect world since the very notion of 'striving' for something would imply that something was less than perfect.

It could never have a sense of accomplishment, since the very notion of accomplishment implies that something had been 'overcome'. But that would imply that something was less than perfect.

The only way that existence could possibly be meaningful or interesting would be to have hazards, and difficulties to overcome. Things to learn (i.e. things you didn't already know).

Things to achieve (i.e. things you couldn't previously do).

A perfect existence would be utterly boring. Especially if it lasted for eternity.

So the idea of eternal spirit creating periods of existence which include hazards, times of confusion, despair, ignorance, and a desire to overcome these things would be natural.

Look at the age of the universe. A human lifetime is shorter than the blink of an eye in comparison with just that. If spirit is eternal, then the age of the universe itself is less than a blink of an eye.

This life would need no justification in the big picture if spirit is eternal.

I believe spirit is eternal, and we are indeed spirit, as is everything that exists. Spirit is all their is, and it's eternal.

That's just my view.

No fee requested for this information, and no taxes will be applied.

Refund not required, If any entity is disatisfied with the content of this post just allow it to evaporate into cyberspace.

You certainly could connect evolution to a creator/designer/god but I think it would have to an indirect link. For example: if the 'creator' designed a certain number of physical elements, knowing they would come together to formulate new ones including what we call lifeforms, then what was created was only those few elements.

The rest would be indirect emergent qualities which proceded from the original creation.

Of course if someone wanted to create a more in depth view to show some kind of 'direct' and personal link between a human being and that creator - it could be maintained that this creator oversees every aspect of every interaction between every element in the universe thereby constructing each and every complex combination of elements into whatever currently exists.

Which is what many people have done. This proves to be a very problematic beleif.

But leaving that part out I can definately understand how people might easily combine their belief in a creative force with evolution.

Ahh... The creator would have to have created a universe that operates under a clear set of scientific principles and if the creator is all knowing then he/she would know what those few elements will eventually become.

Cause and effect. If I line up a row of dominoes and push over the first one with the intention of eventually knocking down the last. Should I not be able to claim responsibility for the final domino falling?

Yes, I agree that particular view is extremely problematic.

That view holds that the creator and the created are seperate entities. Thus requiring a link of "purposeful design"

That's the Western View!

The Eastern View of pantheism makes the link in an entirely different way. It simply recognizes that the creator and created are one in the same entity. All is spirit.

Not really - unless you are also willing to attribute all manner of atrocity to the deity in question. Knowing that certain elements will eventurally come together to create an RNA strand does not account for every possible mutation that would occur in every single new strand.

However, I wouldn't argue that such a deity/designer might have known all possible ways that the created main elements could come together, if certain cosmic laws were instituted.

But to go any further in that thought process is to take away what you are trying to sew together - that evolution is a process, uncontrolled by anything other than the cosmic laws that govern the universe into which the main creation was infused.

Now take your example of the dominoes - dismantle them into the smallest possible elements of which they are constructed. Put all those elements into a box and shake it up. Would you create even one domino?

If the designer/deity wanted to end up with perfect dominoes why leave it to a flawed system,like evolution, why not just create them?

To which Eastern view of pantheism are you referring, Abra?

Personally, if I were creating a universe into which conscious life forms would develop, I would make some permanent provision within the molecules to make such a panteistic view an inherant quality.

What a wonderful global socialism we would have. What great fun we could have developing all manner of environmentally friendly technology. We would enjoy this world of sensual pleasures without corruption, hate, greed, and no need of morals. By our inherant nature we would not knowingly harm anything or anyone.

Redy

I appreciate your views and opinions on the matter. Thank You. Could you clarify some things please?

I am wondering how is evolution flawed?

Can you define atrocity in a way that is not human centered? Would an all knowing being really have the same opinion of what we view as an atrocity?

I believe if God created time then he/she must exist outside of it. If this is true then yes he/she can consider all possible mutations. What we see as random in a temporal world would indeed be planned or at least known to such a being.

Also evolution is not nearly random as you suggest. Convergence in evolution repeatedly shows us that their are selective forces that shape things similarly. If it was completely random then convergent evolution would not exist.

As humans we normally consider atrocity to be hideous acts of cruelty mostly to other humans but also to other living creatures.

But in a deity/designer that would have the ability to design every feature of every living creature equally, I would consider it an atrocity that millions of living creatures should be given substandard (less than equal) designs. Specifically (for all creatures not just human)genetic diseases, birth defects, and that even the birthing process should present so much risk to mother and child.

I'm not suggesting that evolution is random at all, I do believe it follows a pattern but that it is not guided beyond a general outline.

For example, we can follow a complex recipe to make some scrumptious meal. We can use the same recipe a hundred times but we can only use the all the ingredients once. The next time we make the dish we have to get all new ingredients. The ingredients are not exact replicas of the original and the dish we make may vary in taste, smell, appearance, and texture.

This is how I view evolution, and it doesn't preclude a designer, it only limits the participation of the designer in favor of pre-selected determinents (or law that were instituded as guidelines for the actual design).

Does that make more sense?

Would it really matter? If it's pantheism, then by definition that word translates literally to: "All is God". If that's not the view, then it's not pantheism.



Maybe we do do that.

After all, on the scale of eternity this entire universe is but a blink of an eye. The entire existence of humanity is but a few "seconds" in geological time.

Besides, some people seem to enjoy the drama.

I'm in agreement with you. I'm not exactly pleased with this particular period of reality myself.

But apparently many other people are.

Maybe we came into this 'movie' out of curiousity, we know realize it's not suited to us, but the only way out is to die. So the bottom line is pretty simple. Do you find this life repugnant enough to be worth ending it?

If not, then clearly it's not all that bad after all.

If you truly found this place unbearable, you'd find a way to leave.

Some people have left via their own choice.

Then god is just a means to adapt to ones environment.

Seems a wholly useless and benign god to me, one without perspective and without personality, not really a god, or something to be worshiped just understood, perhaps nature is a better word.

What we see in evolution isn't decisions made ahead of time, but reactions to environmental change. Its a harsh selection process coupled with a lottery of characteristics.

Thank you for clarifying but evolution does not create substandard designs. Evolution acts on populations not individuals. Mutation acts on individuals but is only a component of evolution.

It is evolution's imperfection that makes it perfect. It allows for variation without witch organisms would experience total extinction when presented with any kind of change (weather, food, disease). By having variation some individuals are able to survive change.

Your response was very interesting and something I had to think and reflect on. This is what I came up with in return.

God is not a means to adapt to ones environment just that organisms were designed with the ability to adapt.

Do you have to worship a god for one to exist?
Does god have to be worthy of worship for he/she to exist?

Your explanation of evolution is not entirely accurate.

As to the purpose of god well that is love. As to the purpose of our creation well again that is love.

Love is worthy of worship.

I believe that evolution is a product of creation as opposed to a means of creation. That is, evolution is the result of a design that is/was intended to produce forms capable of interacting with the environment in the way that they do.

The thing I think is basically what makes man superior to other life forms on earth is that this particular form (the human body) is better for exploring and investigating different types of environments in more detail, and thus, is more suited to gaining a wider and deeper understanding of the world and has a greater capacity for monipulating the things of the world.

Awesome. I like it.

if anything creation and God would both be a product of evolution and this can be proved by asking this one simple question

"can something come from nothing"

if the answer is no....then God,creation and evolution could not exist
if the answer is yes..it could explain the existence of all three

but either way something had to pre-exist god for him to evolve from or exist and create within ...this is why God and creation can only be a product of evolution

I would have to begin with...

Define 'God'.

Right.


What part? It was a simplification so in that respect certainly.

In simplest scientific terms evolution is the variation in allele frequencies in a population over time.

However a truly proper answer would be quite in depth, but seeing as how you prefaced this post as more philosophical in nature I did not feel it important to get rather in depth. If we all agree that evolution occurs over time we can get into depth when and if you start claiming evolution is guided or not, haven't seen that claim yet.

Ok, so the good old teleological argument, ok.

No but if god is mearly a mechanism that makes universes able to be life bearing with no purpose or direction or guidance, its not much of what most poeple call a god, or would agree is worthy of worship. I think this is wrapped up more in how you want to define god really. If I define god as that feeling I get in my stomach when I eat hot sauce, then god definitely exists.





One question, so if you think that the universe was set up for life, do you think the universe was setup for mankind?

Fatalism. So it was pre determined the outcome? No variation could creep in? Nothing unexpected? So there is no random?

Fate?