Thoughts on next video...

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm curious DeistPaladin, why do you believe in God?

A sense of awe I have about the grand machine we call the universe, from the macro to the micro, as well as over the potential not just of the human mind but human civilization. A lot came together for us in our evolution and not just in terms of increased cranial capacity. The fact we walk upright, we have opposable thumbs, we lost our body fur so we could develop language, out sense of community, all came together for what we might one day achieve as a species.

None of this, I realize, decisively proves God. Maybe we just won the cosmic lottery. That, among other reasons, is why it's just a personal philosophy for me. Deism is for me a truce between my skeptical brain and my lofty sentiments, a way to be spiritual and yet remain firmly and safely grounded in the real, natural world.

Bolded the bit that really, really stood out (plenty in there to choose from)

This is how you understand that to have happened? That our body hair essentially fled in preparation - so that the goal of language could be accomplished?
(of course everything mentioned falls under the category of "human being really thinks human beings are awesome" btw)

[Mystic]

Rhythm, let it be, let's talk about his plans for the video.

[DeistPaladin]

Bolded the bit that really, really stood out (plenty in there to choose from)

This is how you understand that to have happened? That our body hair essentially fled in preparation - so that the goal of language could be accomplished?
(of course everything mentioned falls under the category of "human being really thinks human beings are awesome" btw)

I don't mind off topic subthreads.

It was something I remember from a biology video on evolution. I didn't quite get the connection at the time and I'll gladly retract it and replace it with how we developed the ability for sophisticated chattering sounds that we formed into language. This has been an important feature in our evolution, since communication is what has enabled us to exchange ideas, invent and cobble together our civilization.

And it's not just human beings either, I should imagine. I would expect to find, if the deist model of the universe is true, that there are many other such projects in the universe.

[The Grand Nudger]

Plenty of them right here on earth, too. No reason to look any further. Look at how evolution "favored" every single creature on this planet? Look how lucky -every single creature living on this planet- was. Beetles? 25% of all known life forms, 40% of all insects (and insects in general seem to have been "favored" heavily). Birds? Wider range of habitat by surface area than any other type of animal (ourselves included). Autotrophs? Kings of this place - the rest of us are just eating their scraps. Actually, the only thing that doesn't seem to have been "favored" so heavily was man - but we overcame that handicap, by leveraging our "gifts" in a novel way.

The chattering we employ has had an effect on our fitness, apparently it doesn't offer as much to some other creatures - one could point to the development of language as a clear indicator of our "lesser" status as creatures, needing more crutches to keep ourselves upright than others.

(overall, the trouble you are having is that you seem to have set the metrics for what species evolution "favored" as the metrics of humanity - self egrandizement, anthropocentrism. I bet that cattle would think that cattle were just super awesome too...if they thought about things like that)

The short version of a long story is that evolution doesn't appear to "favor" anything - though it's a very poetic way of describing it - and we appreciate that sort of thing (chattering apes, after all). Some things remain, some things do not. I don't understand why you've assigned a human attribute like "favor" to something like evolution (note that I do understand why human beings do this, and I do acknowledge that we have a tendency to do this......).

[DeistPaladin]

(overall, the trouble you are having is that you seem to have set the metrics for what species evolution "favored" as the metrics of humanity - self egrandizement, anthropocentrism. I bet that cattle would think that cattle were just super awesome too...if they thought about things like that)

It isn't humans that I think are super awesome. It's civilization that I think is super awesome.

[The Grand Nudger]

Ant civilization is super awesome too, right? And bacterial civilization? on and on.

(a common answer is that they don't actually have civilizations demonstrating again precisely what I'm talking about - human thinks human stuff is super awesome, not that I don't, mind you - after all, I'm human too)

[DeistPaladin]

Ant civilization is super awesome too, right? And bacterial civilization? on and on.

(a common answer is ...

...that they don't actually have civilizations...

...demonstrating again precisely what I'm talking about - human thinks human stuff is super awesome, not that I don't, mind you - after all, I'm human too)

Other beings in the universe might have civilizations at our level or above as well. Such life forms might be very different from humans. In fact, I stated that for the deist model to make much sense to me, I should expect that we will find such intelligent life in our universe.

So no, I don't think this is anthropomorph-centrism.

[The Grand Nudger]

Which is the problem I'm talking about, again. Your measure of what is compelling or expected (even in an alien species) is that they have a civilization (would they need one? perhaps they were much better equipped than we and don't require it) and it's equal to or greater than our own. I'm not sure why this suggests any favor in the first place - and the metrics seem completely arbitrary to me in any case. I understand that you think civilization is super awesome...what I'm asking is this, if it isn't just a self interest and preference for human things, human stuffs - stuff thats like human things and human stuff - shoehorning human stuff into the fabric of the cosmos (anthro)

-in what way does civilization establish that any favor was granted - by anything (deist god or run of the mill evolution)?

---

An interesting and related aside (of the aside) in what way would the "deist model" or evolution favoring one thing or another differ from the model absent of the deist god, absent of any favor?

[DeistPaladin]

-in what way does civilization establish that any favor was granted - by anything (deist god or run of the mill evolution)?

The capacity for higher reasoning and ultimately the ability to build on the foundations we've been given (traveling to the stars, terraforming other worlds, creating and modifying life).

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm not sure I understand how that establishes that any favor was granted, perhaps theres some way you could elaborate for me.

I think I've found a way to clarify my position in a way that gets the tone right btw:

Investing the universe or evolution, or god with something like "favor" is anthropomorphism -even if it were true.

As a human, referring to something like civilization as a justification for the above would be anthropocentrism - even if it were true.
(I mean, you could have pointed to anything, what makes civilization the most important thing, the thing that bears mention? Why not the beetles or the birds?)

The trouble I'm having, is that we're justifying anthropomorphism with anthropocentrism - not that doing this would make either false (though we have a pretty bad track record with both - which is why the terms are seen as derogatory) and I don't see why we have to add a deist god into the mix to do either (that's laying aside that I don;t agree with doing either).