Probability of life.

[The Magic Pudding..]

Sounds like a Marcusian sentiment.
My atheist world view doesn't allow for miracles.

I'm talking about the miracle of evolution which got us here to develop consciousness.

I've never come across Marcuse, but I'll wager his theories have been challenged.

I'm using this definition of miracle:
"an extraordinary and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws and is therefore attributed to a divine agency."

Evolution is not a miracle

[Asmodean]

  Listen to the roo-loving* upside-down man in the stolen royal hat.

Evolution is a process, not a miracle.

*...In soup, not in Biblical sense. Or... Wait, it's Puds. Does he even appreciate roo soup? What if he doesn't even like roos? would that automatically invalidate the wisdom of suing proper definitions? Somehow, it feels like it must.

There be philosophy to be done, and The Asmo shall be done doin' it.

Point is, if it can be explained a tenth as well as evolution, then it has loooong since ceased to be a miracle - except with far more Os.

[zorkan]

I soon found plenty of websites on evolution which use the word miracle.
Like molecules which found a way to replicate before evolution even started.

"An even greater appeal to miracles is found in evolutionary stories about the origin of life, because until reliable self-replication begins, there can be no natural selection. Consequently, evolutionists cannot avail themselves of their favourite hand-waving rescue device and can only appeal only to laws of chemistry and to chance."

But if it's offensive to use that word here, I won't use it.

[Dark Lightning]

It's not a matter of offense, it's just wrong. In any event, that so-called "miracle" is actually called abiogenesis, and people looking into that are seeing some promise.

[Recusant]

I soon found plenty of websites on evolution which use the word miracle.
Like molecules which found a way to replicate before evolution even started.

"An even greater appeal to miracles is found in evolutionary stories about the origin of life, because until reliable self-replication begins, there can be no natural selection. Consequently, evolutionists cannot avail themselves of their favourite hand-waving rescue device and can only appeal only to laws of chemistry and to chance."

But if it's offensive to use that word here, I won't use it.

Go ahead and use it, nobody's stopping you. Certainly the Discovery Institute would approve. Just to be clear about who they are and what they do. Liars for Jesus.

[zorkan]

I'm referring to natural miracles and not the supernatural ones of the bible.
Life is not inevitable on this planet.
It arose by chance and not design.
The bible did sort of get right by saying that man was born out of dust.
Another possibility is life was seeded from space by viruses or bacteria.
If correct, their chances of hitting the earth in the right conditions is quite high.

One thing I don't accept is the name Jesus.
There never was such a person roaming around the land of Israel.
Jesus is not even a Jewish name.
There were any number of Christs in lands not far away, and all of them predate him.

[Recusant]

The unattributed quote that you used comes from a Discovery Institute site. That should be a clue regarding their use of the term "miracle."

[Tank]

I'm referring to natural miracles and not the supernatural ones of the bible.
Life is not inevitable on this planet.
It arose by chance and not design.
The bible did sort of get right by saying that man was born out of dust.
Another possibility is life was seeded from space by viruses or bacteria.
If correct, their chances of hitting the earth in the right conditions is quite high.

One thing I don't accept is the name Jesus.
There never was such a person roaming around the land of Israel.
Jesus is not even a Jewish name.
There were any number of Christs in lands not far away, and all of them predate him.

There is no such thing as a natural miracle. A miracle is by definition supernatural. It's use in a natural context is misuse of the word.

[zorkan]

Everything in language is metaphor.
I accept that if the word miracle is unacceptable here, then another should be used.
How about unlikely.

But even JC might have been a drug dealer and make natural miracle cures.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jan/06/science.religion

He might also have been a magic mushroom as proposed by John Allegro.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sacred_Mushroom_and_the_Cross

"Buddha" dealt in the soma.
Whatever that was it would have been an hallucinatory drug.
"If you see buddha on the path, kill him."

[Recusant]

"Buddha" dealt in the soma.
Whatever that was it would have been an hallucinatory drug.
"If you see buddha on the path, kill him."

Can you cite a source for the claim that Buddha "dealt in soma"?

[Icarus]

If the Buddha  folks use a little bit of snort, or some magic mushrooms, they are only trying to achieve Nirvana.

If I wanted to be involved with a religion I think that I might choose Buddha. Not because of the use of happy medicines, but because they don't have a God.

[Asmodean]

Everything in language is metaphor.
I accept that if the word miracle is unacceptable here, then another should be used.
How about unlikely.

That is untrue. Everything is a matter of agreement with regards to the proper association, to be sure, but a metaphor... That, it may or may not be, and usually isn't.

If I say "cat," you may imagine a small, furry creature that likes sleeping on laptop keyboards - or you may imagine a big, angry yellow thing with a massive mane - or the guy who sang "Wild World" and "Morning Has Broken." It does not mean that "cat" is a metaphor for either - only that there is no agreement between us as to what we associate the word with. Metaphors do require that agreement to work - otherwise, they are just misunderstandings.

As for it being unacceptable, far from it - like any other word, it has its place. It does carry its baggage, however, which one should be mindful of when choosing it over often more precise substitutes. For instance, you can certainly use "The miracle of life" to describe the process by which living things originated from non-living components. We don't know how they did it, only that they did. However, calling it a miracle also implies a degree of unknowability. If you want to imply it - you've found your word. If not - maybe "origin" or "emergence" would be better in the given context.

miracle cures.

A miracle cure is a cure that, if we disregard the outright-bullshit varieties, should not work, but (allegedly) does. When a cure is expected to work (though not necessarily universally, but in a large enough sample for statistical significance) then it's just a cure - no modifiers necessary.

magic mushroom

This, on the other hand, is an example of a metaphor. The very mundane muggle-shrooms are, in fact, hallucinogenic., and so their effects can be perceived as "magical."

[zorkan]

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8583800/

[zorkan]

If religious experience was not based on drugs, I cannot think what it is based on.
Big health problems in those days.
The word Christ is a almost certainly a code word for a substance that can provide pain relief.
Read John Allegro.
Christ Buddha, Chrishna, Yeshua Christ examples that spread down the old trading routes from far east to near east.
There never was just one buddha or one Christ.
Plenty of shamans who made a living, just like witch doctors.
In most cases the patient recovers naturally, then the witch doctors get the credit.

[Recusant]

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8583800/

Interesting paper, thank you (link to full text). However, it does not provide any evidence that Buddha "dealt in soma." While use of soma is an ancient practice preceding Buddha by centuries if not well over a thousand years, I have not encountered any indication that he had anything to do with it. What you've brought is a paper describing later Buddhists who had a likely syncretic involvement with it. From the paper:

No direct connection of any psychedelic mushroom to any Buddhist tradition has yet been demonstrated, but I present evidence here which shows that in a Buddhist alchemical tradition, probably a continuation of the Vedic soma use, Amanita muscaria was taken under certain conditions to achieve enlightenment.