What I have said was...shaken

AA
I think that my chronic inability to say things clearly may have been overcome in the statement published on the blog under the heading God, in other words had nothing to do with it (http://aniktosdialogos.blogspot.com/) A second reading might make it clear that I am being misquoted when old friend Phivos accredits me with
The extrapolation (Dimitri), that our DNA is the sole contributor to our nature and actions, is unsound, in that it leaves multidimensional influence variables out of the equation. I will be prepared to conceit that it describes a mechanism but not the cause.

What I have said was that
"Η εξελικτική μας πορεία " was what? Necessity has formulated our rules and regulations, which we eventually turned into laws, or, so important and crucial were they that we incorporated them into our genes....

and I gave examples of what I meant. In other words, the "multidimensional variable influences" that Phivos refers to, are exactly what I have said contribute to our DNA, which in turn determines our behaviour as well as our other components as human beings.

BB
As a confirmed Atheist, I have found my "positive dogmatism" somewhat shaken of late and I should like to introduce a new element for discussion, as an introduction to which I take something I have said apropos in the same blog God, in other words had nothing to do with it
A positive dogmatist would then be someone who has an unshakable belief in the accuracy of his position, until proof OR REASONABLE ARGUMENT to the contrary is provided. In other words, You and I! :-))
I have recently read Dostoevsky's The Brothers of Karamazov, and I have just completed "The Idiot". I could not help crying in places at the author's pain at humanity's cruelty to itself, but also the dignity which characterises, distinguishes and separates us from other animals. Dostoevsky was deeply Orthodox religious and so obviously such a "humane" person, full of compassion and love for his fellow beings, yet had a weakness for gambling which is so in conflict with his undoubted genius, that it shocks me into stupefaction.

But what shook my confidence in atheism was a part of the introduction to the book, written by a A. D. P. Briggs, a university professor. He said that the concept of Intelligent Design (Creation by God) is now given scientific credence by the discovery of some tiny machine-like structures in nature which are "irreducibly complex", which means that they could not have emerged from a process of Darwinian natural selection, or by chance alone. There is, for example, a "flagellar motor" within a bacterial cell, using its thirty distinct moving parts to rotate at 100.000 rpm, which has all the appearance of a machine designed by engineers; there MUST be intelligence behind it!

CC
I am copying this to my brother Panicos, who is a religious fanatic and would probably be able to contribute to the discussion.


DIMITRIS