Driving Force

[Halbhh]

I must admit, this inference does leave one to ponder...?

Meaning, one could adopt evolution by natural selection in it's entirety, along with abiogensis, and etc... And yet still ask, 'what' drives such forces? Does there exist a way to test for such? Or must we merely appeal to all sorts of violated logical fallacies (i.e.) argument from ignorance, special pleading, and-the-like?

Hello, I don't think we've met. My name is Hal, and you are James? Nice to meet you!

Evolution is driven by chemistry I think we agree. Right? It's biochemical stuff, mutations accumulating in the genes, and then changing environments at times selecting for the mutations already available that are beneficial in the new conditions. It's just chemistry.

And chemistry is just a subset of physics. Chemistry is only physics in action.

Physics, the fundamental laws of nature such as how gravity works (Einstein's General Relativity is the more general and accurate version of the good approximation we all learn in school of Newton's laws of gravity), the forces of electromagnetism, the nuclear forces, all matter, energy forms. From these flow chemistry, biochemistry, geology, you name it.

So far, humanity has found these are all following consistent laws that can be discovered and written down.

Nature has consistent laws, and that means physics -- the most basic laws of nature -- is how Nature works.

From A to Z. Entirely.

The entire Universe is simply physics in action.

And this also aligns perfectly with the Bible.

We understand God can intervene in Nature, from the scriptures, and that He created Nature, and all that is, but we are not told any small details of that creation process in the Bible, but instead in the first verse of the Bible a general statement without details --

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth."

Because another topic entirely is the goal.

Leaving everything about how physics works, and how life unfolded past the most broad-brush general poetic allusion entirely unaddressed, because the purpose of the chapter (and the book, and the entirety of the Bible) is to help us relate to God, not to teach us math or geology or engineering or how to farm or fish, etc., etc. The scripture is entirely about our relationship with the Ineffable, the Transcendent -- "God".

So, how should you read Genesis chapter 1 (if you dare to go on an adventure to try to get closer to the ineffable ground of all being)?

In the same listening way you'd read a poem, trying to hear it as a whole, and get the subtle evocative meanings under the surface....

Here's a good example of how you'd want to read -- the same way you'd read this if reading just for your own gain, as a poem that can gift something to you:

Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening
BY ROBERT FROST
Whose woods these are I think I know.
His house is in the village though;
He will not see me stopping here
To watch his woods fill up with snow.

My little horse must think it queer
To stop without a farmhouse near
Between the woods and frozen lake
The darkest evening of the year.

He gives his harness bells a shake
To ask if there is some mistake.
The only other sound’s the sweep
Of easy wind and downy flake.

The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep.

Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening by Robert Frost
(Frost's poetry has recently entered the public domain, which is quite wonderful)

See, God wants to give us something far more valuable than some mathematics or chemistry or geology (even those these are fascinating to many of us) -- something so much more lasting and wonderful.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Why don't we just start from the beginning...where does evolution start?

With self-replicating organic molecules. That's what our DNA is.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

I must admit, this inference does leave one to ponder...?

Meaning, one could adopt evolution by natural selection in it's entirety, along with abiogensis, and etc... And yet still ask, 'what' drives such forces? Does there exist a way to test for such? Or must we merely appeal to all sorts of violated logical fallacies (i.e.) argument from ignorance, special pleading, and-the-like?

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "drives". Do you mean it in a kind of goal-oriented sense, or simply in a mechanical sense? Because, at least as I understand it, the mechanical aspect is simply that there is no "drive" per se, but rather there is just pure machinery--these organic molecules self-replicate, it's just what they do. In the same way that water molecules when given changes in temperature and/or pressure can either slow down or become excited resulting in a change in the state of matter.

I'm not even remotely well equipped enough to explain the mechanistic processes behind complex organic molecule replication.

Beyond pure mechanistic processes, if the question enters into a metaphysical/teleological conversation, then we're no longer talking science.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Kenny'sID]

With self-replicating organic molecules. That's what our DNA is.

-CryptoLutheran

Where did those come from?

 

[cvanwey]

Where did those come from?

A better question being, where did God come from? (Insert special pleading.....now)

 

[cvanwey]

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "drives". Do you mean it in a kind of goal-oriented sense, or simply in a mechanical sense? Because, at least as I understand it, the mechanical aspect is simply that there is no "drive" per se, but rather there is just pure machinery--these organic molecules self-replicate, it's just what they do. In the same way that water molecules when given changes in temperature and/or pressure can either slow down or become excited resulting in a change in the state of matter.

I'm not even remotely well equipped enough to explain the mechanistic processes behind complex organic molecule replication.

Beyond pure mechanistic processes, if the question enters into a metaphysical/teleological conversation, then we're no longer talking science.

-CryptoLutheran

I appreciate the honesty. Right there with yea, about your cited topic...

 

[ViaCrucis]

Where did those come from?

Simple answer is we don't know. However there are several hypothetical models out there that might explain how things could have started; but they are just that, hypothetical models. We just don't, at present, have enough data and evidence to have a tested and working theory.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[cvanwey]

Simple answer is we don't know. However there are several hypothetical models out there that might explain how things could have started; but they are just that, hypothetical models. We just don't, at present, have enough data and evidence to have a tested and working theory.

-CryptoLutheran

I have to say, your answers are very refreshing Thanks

Sometimes 'we don't know yet', 'we may not ever know', or simply 'I don't know but maybe someone more qualified in this specific field can elaborate', may be the 'better' choice to infer.

But to instead assert a conclusion, (posit God answer here), due to some variation of the argument from ignorance, seems more-so vacuous.

 

[Kenny'sID]

A better question being, where did God come from? (Insert special pleading.....now)

Easy, The word is, he was always there.

"Special pleading"? what does that mean?

 

[cvanwey]

Easy, The word is, he was always there.

"Special pleading"? what does that mean?

Then the rebuttal answer is equally as easy, if we are just going to blankly assert a conclusion...

So was the 'universe'. Except, I appear to be ahead in this race, as we both most likely agree the universe exists to begin with...

'Special pleading is a form of fallacious argument that involves an attempt to cite something as an exception to a generally accepted rule, principle, etc. without justifying the exception. The lack of criticism may be a simple oversight or an application of a double standard.'

 

[Kenny'sID]

Simple answer is we don't know. However there are several hypothetical models out there that might explain how things could have started; but they are just that, hypothetical models. We just don't, at present, have enough data and evidence to have a tested and working theory.

-CryptoLutheran

That's too bad, And in that case, I'd suggest you all stop teaching evolution as fact until you do know.

 

[cvanwey]

That's too bad, And in that case, I'd suggest you all stop teaching evolution as fact until you do know.

Yea, evolution is 'just a theory', right? What a minute, so is gravitational theory, cell theory, germ theory, etc...

What he is speaking about does not really pertain to evolution per se.

 

[Kenny'sID]

So was the 'universe'. Except, I appear to be ahead in this race, as we both most likely agree the universe exists to begin with...

No, we don't agree, it was created by God. Maybe I can save us a bit of time here. You have no proof it was evolution that did it, and I won't be able to prove to you it was God, and we likely never will, so that's a dead heat, no need to go further, done it to death waste of time to discuss, so I do hope you weren't actually planning on going there......again..

'Special pleading is a form of fallacious argument that involves an attempt to cite something as an exception to a generally accepted rule, principle, etc. without justifying the exception. The lack of criticism may be a simple oversight or an application of a double standard.'

So since no one here has justified the so-called accepted rule, then your arguments are basically all special pleading. Or in short, a way that "might" fool someone into believing you are right and you can't be argued with. A lot like evolution cannot be proven because science proves nothing, you just have to believe it.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Yea, evolution is 'just a theory', right? What a minute, so is gravitational theory, cell theory, germ theory, etc...

Your just being silly now, that's not even a decent attempt...we all know gravity can be felt, germs seen, and so on.

Prove evolution for us, then I'll listen, but until then, at least stop what your doing.

 

[cvanwey]

No, we don't agree, it was created by God. Maybe I can save us a bit of time here. You have no proof it was evolution that did it, and I won't be able to prove to you it was God, and we likely never will, so that's a dead heat, no need to go further, done it to death waste of time to discuss, so I do hope you weren't actually planning on going there......again..

I think you might want to re-read my last response We both agree the universe exists, which means we are already on shaky ground, when you first have to establish, at least, the existence of your asserted specific agent.

Furthermore, when did I came it was evolution? Evolution itself does not even make the claim to be to 'origin' of life, but something like abiogenesis does.

However, I am not an 'evolutionist'. I accept it's claims as valid, but I do not live or die my such a theory as any causal agency. And again, neither does evolution. My question pertains to what 'drives' evolution.

So I think you are barking up the wrong tree.

In this topic thread, I question what is the 'driving force'? I already know you are going to assert your specific God. However, as the supplied definition reflects, you are making a blank assertion, as you also happily admitted in your last response.

So since no one here has justified the so-called accepted rule, then your arguments are basically all special pleading. Or in short, a way that "might" fool someone into believing you are right and you can't be argued with. A lot like evolution cannot be proven because science proves nothing, you just have to believe it.

Yea, those pesky scientists, and their evolution. More like... 'evil'-ution.

 

[cvanwey]

Your just being silly now, that's not even a decent attempt...we all know gravity can be felt, germs seen, and so on.

Prove evolution for us, then I'll listen, but until then, at least stop what your doing.

Or even better, take a remedial biology class

 

[Moral Orel]

That's too bad, And in that case, I'd suggest you all stop teaching evolution as fact until you do know.

We should stop teaching American History too, since we don't know who the first person to come here was.

 

[Kenny'sID]

We should stop teaching American History too, since we don't know who the first person to come here was.

Why?

 

[Kenny'sID]

Furthermore, when did I came it was evolution? Evolution itself does not even make the claim to be to 'origin' of life, but something like abiogenesis does.

Nope it surely does not, those pesky scientists love to keep that part out of it, but like it or not, the beginning of evolution is part of evolution.

However, I am not an 'evolutionist'. I accept it's claims as valid,

I know, and that answers your first question. It was clear you accepted their claims, implicating evolution as the way.

Yea, those pesky scientists, and their evolution. More like... 'evil'-ution.

A supposed cute cut down, and that's it? I guess that beats having to actually reply to the meat of the post. Anyway, moot point, at least until you prove evolution is a fact. And not evil as you put it, more like ignorant.

So I think you are barking up the wrong tree.

In this topic thread, I question what is the 'driving force'? I already know you are going to assert your specific God. However, as the supplied definition reflects, you are making a blank assertion, as you also happily admitted in your last response.

Not sure what you mean by my barking up the wrong tree, I'm trying to answer to your posts. I'm aware of what the OP is discussing and I would hope you know I'm on the God side of this by now.

As to the blank assertion, far from it.

Since you guys have zero explanation how it started, and since evolutionists also use plenty of what they would consider common sense assumptions to reach their goal, I have a few of my on.

"In the beginning God" makes much more sense than in the beginning nothing or who knows. And I already know the arguments there "We don't know how it began, we don't know it was nothing blah, blah blah" but until you can do better than that, I'm perfectly satisfied it began just like we have seen things always begin, someone began it, then finished it.

Have you ever seen anything just start then finish itself without a creator? Men create things all the time just as they are in a finished state, so why not the universe earth, plants and animals just as they are, in a finished state?

Where is my evidence? The universe and all it entails exist for starters, and I have never once seen anything just happen with no reason and once again, without someone doing it...

Physical evidence? Show me absolute proof of evolution and we can talk about that. Now you are saying you just want the driving force, and what I'm trying to tell you, if you cannot prove evolution you have no business blowing off the driving force with your silly made up terms in the quote below when your solution is no better...unless it can be proven:

Or must we merely appeal to all sorts of violated logical fallacies (i.e.) argument from ignorance, special pleading, and-the-like?

I'll make it even more simple for you. You can't determine the driving force for something until you are certain how/why that something came about. Try this, assume there was only one man on the planet, and he built the first car, the only possible way to find out it's driving force would be to talk to that man, and if you don't believe the man made the car then you need to address where you think it came from first, and prove that is a fact before you can draw an accurate conclusion... the very reason I keep asking you to prove evolution, or actually any reasonable alternative to that.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Or even better, take a remedial biology class

The "You don't understand science" thing has been done to death as yet another excuse not to prove evolutionary, so if you think my ignorance of simple biology is truly a problem, simply answer any questions I might have after you prove evolution. Surely you know there will be questions after you think you have proven evolution.

See how easily solved that is?