The arguments for and against evolution seems to us apodictical esistential pantheists silly as hell. Of course evolution is possible, and it accounts for the World as we know it, allovit. But Reglgion is equally dumb insisting that the whole thing was 'created' to be the way in an instant, by some sore of supernatural entity.
But everyone else seems to be missing the most critical point with its essential q's: Why are things they are and not some other way?
It's apparent that not just life but everything else had probably evolved from that enormous heaviness of nothingness, with the Big Bang. From that point things proceeded as they had to, just as with later kinds of evolution like life. However the big
question is, if life has any significance atall, why does evolution proceed as it does, to let it happen. After all, the humanoid doesn't seem to assume any sort of importance in the Big Picture.
Still intuition insists that it must, that we're the entire reason for there being a Universe. As has been observed by thinkers smarter'n me, "There seems to be a 'Plan' "
The problem of a God settin' it all up, so much contradiction and paradox is involved; like, where did She come from, and why did She feel compelled to make all this possible? And why just now, in this vast stretch of geologic time ? The pantheist responds, 'It's all resolved by assuming She isn't supernatural, but \ a perfectly natural phenom, 'creation' explained by the fact that She/He/It, All, in Its different forms has been around forever and is the way it is because there isn't any feasible mans by which it couldn't [Just hastabe
, ain't no other possible way way].
We'd maintain that the whole idea of a God on one hand and a World on he other is a form of dualism dependent on the humanoid thinkin' system where everything is classified into a kind of entity, whereas in truth nothing is entirely anything while everything is partly something else. Regarding God, She's the Whole Schebang, all the activity therein Her thinking. All right, you don't even hafta call it All 'God,' but whatever you like.
The trick for us [not me for gosh sake, I'm 86 w/ Alzie's] is to explain why there's no alternative system that could account for the Universe, maybe one without humanoids. The answer, I think, lies in demonstrating the interdependence of the constants: Let's say, for instance, the slightest change in one would make one or more of the rest impossible. To my fellow pantheists of this persusasion this is pretty persuad\sive, but I'm just not the theoretical physicist for a followup
Time will tell, you'll see.