0

In the book Nature's Destiny, Michael Denton discusses the principle of plenitude, where he claims that all possible viable life forms on a planet like earth appear to have been actualized (as a sort of perfection of nature. see wikipedia link).

Do our sources discuss this at all, i.e. whether the principal of plenitude is correct?

To quote from Denton's book one of many examples of this (pg.306):

Another example where all possibilities consistent with biological design may have been realized is seen in the ways by which organisms move. We have in air, jet propulsion, gliding flight, flapping flight, ballooning; on land articulated legs; in water, jet propulsion, swimming, and even by propeller in the case of bacteria.

The principle appears compatible with the idea of the perfection of nature to teach on the infinite ability of the Creator as brought in the Duties of the Heart ch.3

Examination of created things means a close study of the elements of which the Universe is composed..the marks of wisdom exhibited in its production, form and shape, and in the purpose for which it was created; the beautiful spirituality of this world; its causes and effects; and the complete perfection for which it was created... and to realize that the Creator created the Universe in a perfect and orderly combination - each of its parts distinctly recognizable, - so that it hints and teaches on the Creator, as a work points to the workman, or a house indicates the builder.

it also convincingly explains entire fields' worth of observations in nature and may also explain what the dinosaurs were doing here.

ray
  • 21,206
  • 2
  • 45
  • 103
  • 1
    namely that all possible viable life forms on earth have been actualized. Considering that there is (presumably) an infinite degree of variability, between two variable options, it seems likely that you are misunderstanding him, or misrepresenting him. | What do our sources say about the reason for the vast diversity of animal and plant forms Are you assuming that they address it? Is a source stating that we cannot fathom God's reasons for creating things acceptable? – mevaqesh Dec 25 '16 at 23:16
  • Again, you cant scale something up infinitely, but there are pretty much an infinite number of variations between 1 and 1.0001. – mevaqesh Dec 26 '16 at 19:16
  • @mevaqesh to clarify more. how many different types of lungs can one make. not a bigger and smaller lung, but different type of functional lung. – ray Dec 26 '16 at 19:23
  • Exactly; not bigger, and not smaller, but that still leaves a (nearly) infinite realm of sub-variability. It depends of course on what you mean by "all possible viable life forms". – mevaqesh Dec 26 '16 at 19:24
  • 1
    I'm going to argue with the following; the author ASSUMES that we've realized all possibilities ("may have been realized") but that's because his understanding of what's possible is limited by what's already observed. Until something happens, it is trivial to dismiss something as "impossible." Ergo, the argument made in your quote is intrinsically fallacious or at least logically flawed. – Isaac Kotlicky Dec 27 '16 at 01:23
  • 1
    Very similar: http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/16914/why-is-there-so-much-space-and-matter-etc-in-the-universe (Though I guess the difference is like that between "mah rabu" and "mah gadelu". – Isaac Moses Dec 27 '16 at 16:25
  • Let us continue this discussion in chat. – Isaac Moses Dec 27 '16 at 20:22
  • Whose translation of the Hovot HaLevavot (or of a translation of of translation of it) is that? It seems particularly important to clarify, since it seems likely that the point is just that there is much intelligence in the design and that all the pieces fit together; which would have nothing to do with the question of plenitude. – mevaqesh Dec 27 '16 at 21:27
  • @mevaqesh here's the hebrew if u prefer http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/mahshevt/hovot/2-2.htm or if you'd like to edit in your own translation go ahead – ray Dec 27 '16 at 21:43
  • Are you unaware that the Hovot Halevavot wasn't written in Hebrew? – mevaqesh Dec 27 '16 at 21:44
  • You haven't answered the question of which translation you used. – mevaqesh Dec 27 '16 at 21:45
  • Yeah, Rambam discusses this. I think it's in Guide for the Perplexed. He is talking about the principle that diamonds, which no one needs for existence, are extremely rare, whereas food, air and water, which everyone needs, are created in the measure needed. It's a long and interesting though logically iffy discussion; cf the "anthropic principle" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle – SAH Mar 17 '17 at 01:56
  • Also see Deuteronomy 28:45-47 – SAH Mar 20 '17 at 09:34

0 Answers0