To all the materialists who think the incredible designs of nature - including on fish, birds, flowers and even caterpillars - emerge from nothing more than the most reductionist scientific evolutionary forces, I joyously disagree with you.

Apr 5, 2021 · 4:04 AM UTC

177
136
88
1,697
I shouldn’t have used the word “reductionist” that way. The people criticizing me on that one are right. My bad. Sorry.
26
7
1
385
Load newest
Replying to @marwilliamson
I am not sure how this is a "materialist" standpoint, but if a trait (mutation) results in a more beneficial mating result... and that propagates that trait (mutation)... that is the definition of "scientific evolutionary" forces... so disagree away, I suppose. #Science
Replying to @marwilliamson
Probably not a good term to use "reductionist" as a description of Nature. It imply that these individual parts don't interact with one another. I think there is a creative force out there; but, on its own terms. It's not comprehensible to a human being's concept of creation.
Replying to @marwilliamson
I'm less joyous in my disagreement with them. But you're more loving, less angry stance is something for me to aspire to.
Replying to @marwilliamson
Nope
Replying to @marwilliamson
Childhood indoctrination leads to a lifetime of delusion.
Replying to @marwilliamson
Clearly you have never seen a fractal
Replying to @marwilliamson
Disagree all you want. You have zero evidence to the contrary. 🤷‍♂️
Replying to @marwilliamson
Biology isn't reductionist though.
Replying to @marwilliamson
Not only are their designs the product of evolution so is your perception of those designs as incredible.
Replying to @marwilliamson @flowermusickids
Marianne ... this is not God... this is evolution via a common ancestor ...
Load more