Natural selection refers to selection by death. Natural things include sin, disease and death. The only type of selection that happens with natural selection is that some creatures die off earlier than others. There is nothing creative about it.
As stated earlier, science and mathematics needs an expression for impossible (if they don’t have one already). Division by 0 is one way to express an impossible situation.
Yet no one is falling ‘prey’ to your ‘vigilance’…
Time to ignore them so as to give them a break
The development is like a growing bush. Our understanding gets fuller, but no branches get cut off.
See the Carter vid I posted. It is clear from the genetic study they did.
That seems like a fair picture, but how would you put that in precise theological terms? I am not suggesting branches are cut off in the old thread. I actually say that no new branches appears if I put it in terms of your analogy.
This was sensible then, and is sensible now. The Church, both in its widest sense of being the people who make it up, and in the sense of its central authority, should never commit itself to anything which is not “completely certain and proved by the facts”. On the other hand, it would also be wise not to deny things which are not “completely certain and proved by the facts” in case these things eventually turn out to be true. Insofar as the philosophical idea that man is qualitatively different from other living things depends on the scientific ‘fact’ of man having only descended from two, and only two, individuals, it was in danger of tumbling in 1950 (which was why Pope Pius tried to defend an uncertain scientific proposition), and could have collapsed altogether by now had not the philosophical idea been disassociated from the science. The philosophy can still be an eternal truth. Its scientific origin is disputable.
I think you’re wrong to be quite so negative about death. Life should not be thought of a thin veneer of success coating a gigantic pile of corpses stretching back into the distant past. Life is not a “now” event, it is a continuous recycling of organic material, gradually expanding in material and organisation, from a simple beginning towards a huge coherence and connectivity of which we have only achieved a fraction at the moment. “There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been and are being evolved.”
There is a style of argument in which a proposition is defended by a series of questions. It is not a logical argument. Ignorance is not a defence of a proposition. Random mutations are most certainly a creative process, probably the most genuinely creative process on the planet. All the rest is reshuffling.
Humani Generis talks specifically about “true humans”. I take that to mean “a human body with a human soul”. The scientific evidence shown that there must have been a lot more than two human bodies. There is no scientific evidence as to the number of human souls.
Ed will only consider two.
That’s your doctrine and dogma. The assertions about “coherence and connectivity” sound a little pantheistic to me.
Do you include the coronavirus in that?
The human body has been found to contain approximately a dozen interdependent systems. Its marvels exceed those of any product of human engineering. It’s not possible that this could exist without a cause. Existence requires a cause. The marvelous design and order of interdependent systems in human anatomy also need a cause.
Are you saying that Pius XII did know enough about the metaphysical first principles? Please re-post replacing the pronouns “he” and “them” with their proper referents to avoid confusion.
Yes.