Which theory of our world holds more truth: Evolution (Pro) God (Con)
Debate Rounds (5)
sci"en"tif"ic adjective based on or characterized by the methods and principles of science.
This means that my theory has been proved by facts. Each living that has existed or exists has a beginning and an end while the God theory has many holes and open ended questions. Therefore the evolution theory can better explain the history of the world
Thank you Pro for sharing your belief, in Round 1, as a “strong believer in God,” as I too believe in God. Since you also believe in God, it would be safe to say, we both believe that this God created the Cosmos and everything in it, which includes the Laws of Nature. Therefore, the Laws of Nature is the handwriting of God and the scientific method is a way to read God's handwriting.
For atheists and those of us of faith, including preachers, prophets etc, should be careful when studying man's written scripture about God. We must remember man is fallible, and those who study or write such scriptures may misinterpret of what God wants; therefore, God gets---and, in some cases, God help us all (“72 virgins” upon a suicide-killing of infidels, etc.).
Because of man's scriptures, God is getting a bad name from concepts trapped in the Dark Ages. Time is overdue for humanity to take the next step in coming to know the wonders of God's Cosmos. My connection with God and humanity is morality. Morality (the fingerprint of God) is an outgrowth of Unalienable Rights, which is an outgrowth of the Constructal Law, which is an outgrowth of the Laws of Thermodynamics. Therefore, Morality is part of the physical Laws of God's Nature, not man-made.
Please bear with me as we take a journey following the traceability path from Thermodynamics (moments after the Big Bang) to Morality. The Laws of Thermodynamics deals with the direction of energy flow. Constructal Law deals with patterns and systems generated by this energy flow as a function of optimization relative to resistance, in the evolution of biology, physics, technology and social organization. At the biological level once alive, “Life,” must have the freedom (“Liberty” or optimization relative to resistance), in “the pursuit (energy flow) of ” survival; otherwise, there is no life. Since we have life, survival is a form of positive-feedback and a prerequisite for human “Happiness.” Hence, Thomas Jefferson's discovery, which he declared “self-evident” and used the labeled Unalienable Rights representing a polished version of this biological energy flow in his following celebrated statement, “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”
The following is a video overview of the Constructal Law:
Continuing with our journey, morality is an outgrowth of life's Unalienable Rights in group formation. The binary values of morality is Right (moral) or Wrong (immoral). The objective of morality is doing Right keeping a group alive. That is, when two or more humans form a group, the group becomes alive. The life of the group is sustained through goodwill and kindness leads to a mutual moral respect for embracing the Unalienable Rights of the members within the group. Goodwill promotes order, stability, and harmony through the pursuit of group-wide positive feedback. Over time, group-wide positive feedback is the genesis of traditions, social values, beliefs (aka Religion), language, etc., the norms of society. These norms are tried and tested, and conservatively pass down from one generation to the next establishing its culture. A moral order guides an individual in the prudent exercise of judgment relative to those norms, going with the social flow minimizing civil resistance (Constructal Law). A moral individual in a civil society strives, albeit imperfectly, to be virtuous; that is, restrained, ethical, and honorable, respecting and embracing the Unalienable Rights of others relative to those tested norms.
The empirical evidence of the diversity of language, “Religion,” and social norms throughout history and today demonstrates morality is the thread that runs through the tapestry in group formation. By the way, throughout the ages, the historical record found not one human culture to be atheistic.
Morality simply refers to the binary state of Right or Wrong. These states generate mutual positive- or negative-feedback, relative to the Unalienable Rights of another. Mutual positive-feedback, in group creation, is found throughout the symphony of life, to name a few, in the beneficial formation in schools of fish, flocks of birds, packs of wolves, tribes of humans, and in addition, inter-specie relationships, such as those between humans and their pets.
Jefferson's discovery of Unalienable Rights found its way in the design of the US Constitution. The prime objective of the US Constitution is to embrace and protect the individual's Unalienable Rights from the crimes of others and from the crimes of government, no more, no less. The state governments did all the rest, while morally competing with each other for the best and brightest.
The US started with a difficult task relative to the cultural reality of the day. A reality experiencing growing pains in the shadow of the Dark Ages during the Enlightenment Era. Cultural norms do not change overnight, because they are inherently conservative. For example, slavery and woman's standing in society were deeply rooted in the culture, including the norms of the ruling-class, for they too reflect the culture of the day. Our founding Fathers knew Unalienable Rights will remove cultural ills, as a result, slavery, the treatment of woman, etc., in time during the evolution of culture as a function of our Unalienable Rights should guide legislation in man-made laws.
Life's Unalienable Rights are the evolution engine of life. These Rights are also the engine for social evolution, if, and only if, the configuration of governance supports such natural engine at the social level. The US Founding Fathers develop a configuration of government supporting evolution eighty some years before Darwin came on the stage.
The event of the US Constitution set off a social experiment, where in just a short period of 200-years, changed the world like no other society in recorded history, through the fruits of technology, food production, and medicine, the stables of human existence throughout the world today. A compelling example, as in a scientific empirical data point, of what happens when our Unalienable Rights are morally free to flow, having minimal resistance (Constructal Law), within the awesome machinery of God's nature, the “invisible hand.”
Relative to our background journey of Morality being a manifestation of Unalienable Rights and the Constructal Law. In this next youtube presentation it all comes together. Starting with the familiar tree pattern (Constructal Law), concluding with the “invisible hand” representing the Laws of Nature---the handwriting of God; and within this awesome machinery of nature, stressing the point of the absence of human “masterminds,” during some universal spontaneous evolution on the road to utopia.
The moral of this youtube presentation is, when morally following the physical Laws of God's Nature (“invisible hand”), amazing things happen to improve the standard of living throughout the human collective, as oppose to some “mastermind's” illusion of what a collective should be. All “Life,” from populations of single cells to humans, the collective is a product of the Laws of Nature on the road to survival, improving, prolonging, adapting, etc., while having the freedom (“Liberty”) in "the pursuit of” some comfort zone (“Happiness”), within the existence of its reality.
At the end of this journey from Thermodynamics to Morality, it is logical to conclude, within a secular educational environment it is important to introduce Morality as a subject of study in a science class. For the importance of morality is crucial in any civil society and especially for those societies under contract with a constitutional form of governance.
John Adams, one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, once stated:
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” (http://www.john-adams-heritage.com...).
Needless to say, over the last hundred years, the US is on a slow transition from a constitutional republic to a tyrannical oligarch, and it continues today; the primary reason, decline in morality due to the lack of education of said subject throughout our society.
Let's switch from governance as a function of Morality, to a popular question found in this debate's comments, “If God used the Big Bang, where did God come from?” A very good question! God is simply the event entity that happened before the Big Bang. That event did happen, and therefore, that event entity is true. What that event entity is, we humans at this point in our evolution, are incapable to comprehend it.
But there is one thing we do know, life is a way for nature, or God's nature, to experience itself. So please enjoy your short vacation from nonexistence, for you been there longer than you been here, experiencing the miracle of existence. For who knows what will happen after we been here, now that we are here, anything is possible, for we know not all the Laws of Nature, aka the handwriting of God.
So in conclusion, which “world holds more truth: Evolution (Pro), God (Con)?” The answer is, they are both true, for they are two different human manifestations of the same entity.
This here states that Man and other animals were the first living things on this Earth when there is no actual fact on it. How do you explain the existence of dinosaurs? Did the human race become extinct during this time? If so how did they come extinct and why aren't there any remains of them to be found? We have proof that at one point dinosaurs we here and that they roamed the Earth. I don't understand how many people can say that God came and made the heavens and the Earth and man and not question all the facts that tell us we were not here first. Take this website for example
http://paleobiology.si.edu... it explains how we all started from a single celled organism and how we EVOLVED from that. Your last argument had a lot but really said nothing. How am I suppose to believe that this spirit first appeared from out of thin air, created the heavens and the Earth, then humans, then killed us all put dinosaurs in place, then killed them all and put us back into place. How do you go from the complex and majestic creature such as the dinosaur then settle for the monstrosity we call the human race.
Con's position is one in believing God is some event-entity that caused the Big Bang, nothing more, nothing less. It was the handwriting of God, the physical Laws of Nature that started the evolution process of the universe, and it continues today. It would be too naive to think us humans, like those “dinosaurs” is the end product of evolution. Evolution will continue with or without humanity. All what we need today, is an asteroid hitting the earth, and one day some other species will be excavating our bones calling us “dinosaurs.”
Con's position of God is one of a deists. That is, God set off the Big Bang but has since remained indifferent to it, as God's Laws of Nature is the instructions, or program, defining the evolutionary process of the universe both inanimate and animate.
Can Con prove the existence of a God, of course not; nor could humanity prove the existence of radio waves 300 years ago. Our metrology has not yet evolved to a state of probing the event-entity that cause the Big Bang. Until then, belief is all what we have, for those who wish to believe.
Today, we are reading the handwriting of God via the scientific method. Coming to understand God's handwriting and trying to correlate it with man's scriptures about God will simply end in confusion, as Pro's dialog demonstrates.
In Round 1 Pro did not define what “God theory” was, leaving the “theory” open for discussion. Con's “God theory” supports evolution via God's physical Laws of Nature. Pro's “God theory” seems to be based on man's written scriptures.
Con's recommendation to Pro, use God's Laws of Nature as a filter when studying man's scriptures about God.
Within the scope of this debate, both Pro and Con believe in God, so the existence of God is not the issue and therefore, not part of this debate. Con explained to Pro that Con is a deists. That is, a deists believes that God set off the Big Bang but has since remained indifferent to the universe, as God's Laws of Nature is the instructions, or program, defining the evolutionary process of the universe both inanimate and animate.
Therefore, God created evolution (the product of God's handwriting---the Laws of Nature), the machinery which created life. Since Pro also believes in God, one would think Pro would be rejoicing over Con's perspective that evolution is God's creation. However, Pro is stuck in man's written scriptures about God (aka the Bible). For example, Pro stated, “You cannot prove that God came out of nowhere and created everything in seven days.”
Where “God came out of,” we simply do not know. As for “created everything in seven days,” we now know, thanks to Albert Einstein's discovery of one of God's Laws of Nature known as “Time Dilation.”
Video presentation: https://www.youtube.com...
According to Einstein's discovery, time is relative; God's timeframe of seven days could have been billions of years in our timeframe. This is the point Con was making to Pro in the last Round. Use God's Laws of Nature as a filter when reading man's written scriptures about God.
In other words, since God created everything, including that theory humanity stumble upon via the scientific method, known today as, evolution. Therefore, “Which theory of our world holds more true: Evolution (Pro), God (Con)”? Since both Pro and Con believe in God, the answer is, God; for God created evolution.
As Albert Einstein once said, “When the solution is simple, God is answering.”
Here we go again, more quotes from man's written scriptures (the Bible, Torah, Quran, etc.).
Like all who interprets man's written scriptures, there is a bias to pick and choose to fit one's narrative. For example, on Pro's rant about the creation “of this Earth,” she left out where God said “Let there be light; and there was light.” This spontaneous light, perhaps, light from the Big Bang. My take on this light from a Big Bang is simply a matter of interpretation, just like Pro's interpretation of Genesis (https://www.biblegateway.com...).
Man's written scriptures of the Bible, Torah, and Quran been in the news a lot these days for their followers are killing each other. However, at the beginning of those scriptures there is one God who created everything; after that, it gets fuzzy.
Just like the news between FOX and MSMBC, right from the beginning the news event is the same; after that, it gets very fuzzy.
Con, being a deists, also believes in one God who created everything, but when reading God's handwriting---the Laws of Nature, comes enlightenment. This enlightenment is enjoyed by all those who follow the Bible, Torah, and Quran, when they drive their automobile to a drive-through restaurant to get a meal to feed their kids in 5 minutes. A compelling example of one from a list of many, of what happens when our Unalienable Rights are morally free to flow, having minimal resistance (Constructal Law), within the awesome machinery of God's nature, the “invisible hand” (Con, Round 2 of this debate).
From the light of God's handwriting, evolution continues and includes advances in technology, food production, medicine, etc, the stables of human existence throughout the world today.
In closing, this deists [Con] finds it morally proper to thank Pro for her time in this debate, and to wish Pro a long and healthy “Life,” having ample freedom (“Liberty”), “in the” moral “pursuit of Happiness.”
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.