Re: [asa] Because of us

An "anthropic principle in Biology" is exactly what I think the evidence from ID boils down to.  A friend of mine and I have coined the term "bioanthropic principle" and I think that nails it.
 
John
 
 

--- On Mon, 4/27/09, Nucacids <nucacids@wowway.com> wrote:

From: Nucacids <nucacids@wowway.com>
Subject: Re: [asa] Because of us
To: gregoryarago@yahoo.ca, asa@lists.calvin.edu
Date: Monday, April 27, 2009, 7:48 AM



"After all we've been through, Mike, here we are again at a new moment. It sounds to me like you're interested in promoting an 'anthropic principle' in biology - 'Because of us'."
 
What did I write that made you think this? 
 
Mike

Mike Gene wrote:
"Once this is realized, the obstacle of chance evaporates. God does not need to tinker with this creation to get us to appear. He created this universe, among an infinite other possible universes, precisely because it was the one that would spawn us."

After all we've been through, Mike, here we are again at a new moment. It sounds to me like you're interested in promoting an 'anthropic principle' in biology - 'Because of us'. Am I right about this? We humans are speaking to ourselves, about our biology (and also about other biologies), though sometimes it sounds like babble!
 
Yes, of course there is the danger of being anthropocentric, but that is not the main obstacle. Religious humility (in its multiple forms) can overcome this. The main obstacle seems to be in getting 'us' to work together to unify our diversities, to seek philosophical-spiritual knowledge in addition to scientific-technical knowledge and to recognize how we can contextualise and relate our knowledge of ourselves (which has been made at least partly by us) and of the universe (which is also given to us) to our knowledge of our Creator, our Lord.
 
If what you're after is indeed such an 'anthropic principle in biology,' I'll be sure to meet you on the playing field or at the discussion table on your quest, Mike.

Cheers,
Gregory
 
 

--- On Mon, 4/27/09, Nucacids <nucacids@wowway.com> wrote:

There are two main obstacles in reconciling Darwinian evolution and orthodox Christianity:
 
1. Darwinian evolution entails that chance plays a central part of our history, as random variations provide the material for selection to cull. So deeply ingrained is the role of chance that the late Stephen Jay Gould was fond of saying that if the tape of life was replayed from the beginning, an entirely different reality would exist, a reality that would not include us. This is simply because we could not count on all the various coincidences and accidents to play out again exactly as they played out in our history.

2. Darwinian evolution entails that death and suffering played a central part of our coming into existence. It is the “struggle for survival”, involving predation and disease, that has been a core part of our evolutionary history.

Orthodox Christianity views human life as an inevitable part of Creation and death/disease as a consequence of the Fall.

How shall we reconcile these?
If  God could have created any one of an infinite number of creations, why did He create this one?  Because of us.  That is, this is the creation, the only creation, in which we exist.   We cannot exist in any other creation.  Other humans or humanoids might exist in other creations, but they would not be us.
This creation exists because it is our home, that is, where we were born and where we live.
So what makes us us? Our genetic identities. Our experiences. Our memories. Our choices. Since all of the things that make us us are part of this creation, this creation must exist if we are to exist.

So how did we come into existence? Was it the miracle of Creationism? Was it the natural law and evolutionary convergence of Conway Morris or Denton ? Was it by front-loading evolution? Or was it the mixture of natural selection and contingency as outlined by Dawkins and Gould? 

Answer – it doesn’t matter. However we came into existence had to be because that was the way we came into existence. It’s a package deal.

So it would not matter if Dawkins/Gould was correct. Because even if chance and natural selection brought us into existence, well, then that’s what would be needed to bring us into existence. God is still in control because this very reality where chance and natural selection brought us into existence would not exist and be sustained if God had not wanted to commune with us. God choose to create this reality whereby chance and natural selection brought us into existence because that is our reality and our history. From God’s perspective, beyond our space-time reality, our emergence was inevitable and foreknown because the very reason this reality was chosen into existence is precisely because God knew it would spawn us, regardless of the mechanism. Creation runs through us and exists because of us.

Once this is realized, the obstacle of chance evaporates. God does not need to tinker with this creation to get us to appear. He created this universe, among an infinite other possible universes, precisely because it was the one that would spawn us.

So why did God create this reality?  It’s the most mysterious and humbling realization and revelation - God loves us.

-Mike

Yahoo! Canada Toolbar : Search from anywhere on the web and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now!

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.287 / Virus Database: 270.12.4/2081 - Release Date: 04/26/09 09:44:00

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Apr 27 10:46:29 2009