My philosophy? Exactly what is that? If your definition of "philosophy" is the one in which "philosophy" refers to the sometimes nonsensical arguments put forth by people like Cant, Socrates, etc. ("If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?"), then, no, I don't have any "philosophy."
However, if we take "philosophy" to mean what its component word roots mean, "philo" = loving and "sophia" = knowledge, that is my "philosophy."
I guess I'm not seeing what beliefs I assigned to you? I thought you asserted your belief in evolution?
You are using the word "believe" in the context of a religious belief. In that context, I do not "believe" in evolution. I accept evolution because all of the available evidence supports it, just like I accept the fact that my bathroom and kitchen floors are made of ceramic tiles, because all of the available evidence supports that. For the record, I also have no religious belief in my ceramic floor tiles.
"You could believe in a created biology with a broad ability to adapt and it would serve you just as well. You are simply trying to understand the system and it's abilities and limits."
Actually, not. The premise of creation is that it is a perfect creation made by a perfect God. It therefore has no need to adapt because it is perfect. I see no evidence that that is the case. What I see is that biological systems are full of features that make no sense unless one accepts that they arose through random events (which aren't as random as creationists try to portray them; they do conform to physical laws which are quite constraining).
Evolution, as a process, isn't even that complicated or amazing.
To me, what is absolutely mind-boggling is that life is maintained in every single organism through the process of countless gadzillions of chemical reactions, and those reactions occur when and where they are needed without any conscious input at all. The fact that gadzillions of chemical reactions can coordinate so well in such a manner that seems so unlikely, however, does not suggest to me that God is up there in Heaven directing all those reactions... I'd think that even for God, that would get boring.
Evolution is not empirical, it is the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Therefore belief in evolution is philosophical.
"You are using the word "believe" in the context of a religious belief. In that context, I do not "believe" in evolution. I accept evolution because all of the available evidence supports it, just like I accept the fact that my bathroom and kitchen floors are made of ceramic tiles, because all of the available evidence supports that. For the record, I also have no religious belief in my ceramic floor tiles."
Again, "You could believe in a created biology with a broad ability to adapt and it would serve you just as well. You are simply trying to understand the system and it's abilities and limits." Evolution is a belief supported by logical fallacy.
"Actually, not. The premise of creation is that it is a perfect creation made by a perfect God. It therefore has no need to adapt because it is perfect. I see no evidence that that is the case."
Apparently you have convinced yourself that a strawman leaves you with no alternative. Interesting justification.
"Evolution, as a process, isn't even that complicated or amazing."
That's correct, it's a fallacy.
"To me, what is absolutely mind-boggling is that life is maintained in every single organism through the process of countless gadzillions of chemical reactions, and those reactions occur when and where they are needed without any conscious input at all. The fact that gadzillions of chemical reactions can coordinate so well in such a manner that seems so unlikely, however, does not suggest to me that God is up there in Heaven directing all those reactions... I'd think that even for God, that would get boring."
Ah, another strawman that leaves you no alternative. Interesting justification.
Evolution is not empirical, it is the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Therefore belief in evolution is philosophical.
"You are using the word "believe" in the context of a religious belief. In that context, I do not "believe" in evolution. I accept evolution because all of the available evidence supports it, just like I accept the fact that my bathroom and kitchen floors are made of ceramic tiles, because all of the available evidence supports that. For the record, I also have no religious belief in my ceramic floor tiles."
Again, "You could believe in a created biology with a broad ability to adapt and it would serve you just as well. You are simply trying to understand the system and it's abilities and limits." Evolution is a belief supported by logical fallacy.
"Actually, not. The premise of creation is that it is a perfect creation made by a perfect God. It therefore has no need to adapt because it is perfect. I see no evidence that that is the case."
Apparently you have convinced yourself that a strawman leaves you with no alternative. Interesting justification.
"Evolution, as a process, isn't even that complicated or amazing."
That's correct, it's a fallacy.
"To me, what is absolutely mind-boggling is that life is maintained in every single organism through the process of countless gadzillions of chemical reactions, and those reactions occur when and where they are needed without any conscious input at all. The fact that gadzillions of chemical reactions can coordinate so well in such a manner that seems so unlikely, however, does not suggest to me that God is up there in Heaven directing all those reactions... I'd think that even for God, that would get boring."
Ah, another strawman that leaves you no alternative. Interesting justification.