Philosophy Now Forum

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 5:12 am Creation is normally associated with a 'creator' with awareness and some degree of intention.
Humans create things with intention.
This is extraordinarily extrapolated to an entity i.e. God creating the universe with awareness and intention.
If things emerge from human actions unintentionally, we do not classify whatever emerge as a creation per se like how humans create things with awareness and consciousness.

Things [nests, etc.] emerging from animals based on their instincts [a blind process] are not regarded as a creation per se.

Evolution is a blind process without any specific entity with awareness and any degree of intention.
As such whatever arises from the processes of evolution are classified as emergents.
Humans are thus emergents emerging out of the processes of evolution.

Humans cannot be considered to be creations.

promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:57 pm It's even worse than that, because a genuine act of 'creation' is ontologically impossible. Sumthin cannot come from nuthin... so what takes new form and/or shape in the universe is just a certain modification of an already existing material. Spinoza 'splains all this.

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 4:43 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 5:12 am Creation is normally associated with a 'creator' with awareness and some degree of intention.
Humans create things with intention.
This is extraordinarily extrapolated to an entity i.e. God creating the universe with awareness and intention.
If things emerge from human actions unintentionally, we do not classify whatever emerge as a creation per se like how humans create things with awareness and consciousness.

Things [nests, etc.] emerging from animals based on their instincts [a blind process] are not regarded as a creation per se.

Evolution is a blind process without any specific entity with awareness and any degree of intention.
As such whatever arises from the processes of evolution are classified as emergents.
Humans are thus emergents emerging out of the processes of evolution.

Humans cannot be considered to be creations.

I know that humans are the result of evolution. That however does not mean that humans cannot be created as it is illustrated in OP.

promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:57 pm It's even worse than that, because a genuine act of 'creation' is ontologically impossible. Sumthin cannot come from nuthin... so what takes new form and/or shape in the universe is just a certain modification of an already existing material. Spinoza 'splains all this.

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Dec 24, 2021 5:23 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 4:43 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 5:12 am Creation is normally associated with a 'creator' with awareness and some degree of intention.
Humans create things with intention.
This is extraordinarily extrapolated to an entity i.e. God creating the universe with awareness and intention.
If things emerge from human actions unintentionally, we do not classify whatever emerge as a creation per se like how humans create things with awareness and consciousness.

Things [nests, etc.] emerging from animals based on their instincts [a blind process] are not regarded as a creation per se.

Evolution is a blind process without any specific entity with awareness and any degree of intention.
As such whatever arises from the processes of evolution are classified as emergents.
Humans are thus emergents emerging out of the processes of evolution.

Humans cannot be considered to be creations.

I know that humans are the result of evolution. That however does not mean that humans cannot be created as it is illustrated in OP.

Note I specified the definition of 'creation' and insisted this term 'creation' cannot be used with reference to the evolution of humans.
Instead we should use the term 'emergence' why can't you use 'emergence' which is more realistic and evident.

If humans are to be created, then it is only humans who should create other humans which is not possible at all [as far as we know].

Age wrote: ↑Fri Dec 24, 2021 5:40 am

promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:57 pm It's even worse than that, because a genuine act of 'creation' is ontologically impossible. Sumthin cannot come from nuthin... so what takes new form and/or shape in the universe is just a certain modification of an already existing material. Spinoza 'splains all this.

And, thee already existing material, known as the Universe, Itself, is continually changing in shape or form ALWAYS. This always evolving constant-change is also known as Creation, Itself.

In other words, the ALWAYS constantly evolving change process of the material, of the One and ONLY Universe, is how ALL things are created, and what the word 'Creation' means or refers to.

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Dec 25, 2021 4:16 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Dec 24, 2021 5:40 am

promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:57 pm It's even worse than that, because a genuine act of 'creation' is ontologically impossible. Sumthin cannot come from nuthin... so what takes new form and/or shape in the universe is just a certain modification of an already existing material. Spinoza 'splains all this.

And, thee already existing material, known as the Universe, Itself, is continually changing in shape or form ALWAYS. This always evolving constant-change is also known as Creation, Itself.

In other words, the ALWAYS constantly evolving change process of the material, of the One and ONLY Universe, is how ALL things are created, and what the word 'Creation' means or refers to.

Evolution is a blind process. By creation, I mean a process guided by an intelligent agent.

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Dec 25, 2021 4:14 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Dec 24, 2021 5:23 am

bahman wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 4:43 pm
I know that humans are the result of evolution. That however does not mean that humans cannot be created as it is illustrated in OP.

Note I specified the definition of 'creation' and insisted this term 'creation' cannot be used with reference to the evolution of humans.
Instead we should use the term 'emergence' why can't you use 'emergence' which is more realistic and evident.

If humans are to be created, then it is only humans who should create other humans which is not possible at all [as far as we know].

How come an intelligent agent cannot create humans through a process if evolution can do this through a blind process?

promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:57 pm It's even worse than that, because a genuine act of 'creation' is ontologically impossible. Sumthin cannot come from nuthin...

promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:57 pm so what takes new form and/or shape in the universe is just a certain modification of an already existing material.

promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 23, 2021 1:57 pm Spinoza 'splains all this.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Dec 25, 2021 10:39 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Dec 25, 2021 4:16 pm

Age wrote: ↑Fri Dec 24, 2021 5:40 am

And, thee already existing material, known as the Universe, Itself, is continually changing in shape or form ALWAYS. This always evolving constant-change is also known as Creation, Itself.

In other words, the ALWAYS constantly evolving change process of the material, of the One and ONLY Universe, is how ALL things are created, and what the word 'Creation' means or refers to.

Evolution is a blind process. By creation, I mean a process guided by an intelligent agent.

You MEAN "evolution is a blind process", to you. To me, evolution is NOT a blind process.

WHY would 'evolution' be a "blind process" when what is actually happening and has occurred can be very easily SEEN. Evolution is also the BLATANTLY OBVIOUS process in which Creation, Itself, occurs. As evident by 'you' evolved AND created human beings.

Also, how could ONE thing ONLY create EVERY thing, or even ANY thing, no matter how intelligent One agent is?

To me, because of your FAILURE to be able to answer my clarifying or challenging questions OPENLY and Honestly and logically, throughout this forum, and your failure to respond to my statements logically without contradicting your previous comments, as well, proves that your assumptions and theories on things are just plain False, Wrong, or Incorrect.

See, until you can explain what you REALLY MEAN by defining words in a Truly uniformed and logical way, without contradicting "yourself" ever, which means in a way that EVERY one could agree with and accept, then you will just have to admit that your views and words here could be Wrong or Incorrect. But, sadly for you, this is NOT some thing you can bring "yourself" to doing, correct?

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 4:44 am

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Dec 25, 2021 4:14 pm

Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Fri Dec 24, 2021 5:23 am
Note I specified the definition of 'creation' and insisted this term 'creation' cannot be used with reference to the evolution of humans.
Instead we should use the term 'emergence' why can't you use 'emergence' which is more realistic and evident.

If humans are to be created, then it is only humans who should create other humans which is not possible at all [as far as we know].

How come an intelligent agent cannot create humans through a process if evolution can do this through a blind process?

You are jumping to conclusion and making too many assumptions.
Based on a bottom-up approach, you assumed there is an intelligent creator based on faith and without solid sound empirical "proofs". This is not critical thinking and being rational. It is rather veering toward being delusional if one is very insistent on it.

I would not prefer to use 'blind process' which imply there is an entity that is blind.

Evolution is based on real empirical evidence and inferred top-down to whatever the conclusions that are supported by the real empirical evidences plus philosophical rationalization.
As such based on real empirical evidences, living things emerge out of the evolutionary process [btw without imputing 'blindness].

Since I am starting from what is really real, what is the problem with that? There is no critical and significant reason for me to assume there is an intelligent creator at all.

You on the other hand is starting with a presumption of an intelligent creator based on faith and without sound and valid verifications and justifications. WHY?
This presumption or rather insistent there is real intelligent creator arise from a psychological problem linked to the inherent existential crisis. [you are likely ignorant or deliberately ignore this point]

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Dec 26, 2021 4:44 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Dec 25, 2021 10:39 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sat Dec 25, 2021 4:16 pm
Evolution is a blind process. By creation, I mean a process guided by an intelligent agent.

You MEAN "evolution is a blind process", to you. To me, evolution is NOT a blind process.

WHY would 'evolution' be a "blind process" when what is actually happening and has occurred can be very easily SEEN. Evolution is also the BLATANTLY OBVIOUS process in which Creation, Itself, occurs. As evident by 'you' evolved AND created human beings.

Also, how could ONE thing ONLY create EVERY thing, or even ANY thing, no matter how intelligent One agent is?

To me, because of your FAILURE to be able to answer my clarifying or challenging questions OPENLY and Honestly and logically, throughout this forum, and your failure to respond to my statements logically without contradicting your previous comments, as well, proves that your assumptions and theories on things are just plain False, Wrong, or Incorrect.

See, until you can explain what you REALLY MEAN by defining words in a Truly uniformed and logical way, without contradicting "yourself" ever, which means in a way that EVERY one could agree with and accept, then you will just have to admit that your views and words here could be Wrong or Incorrect. But, sadly for you, this is NOT some thing you can bring "yourself" to doing, correct?

By blind process, I mean that it is not guided by an intelligent agent.