[Darrell]

Originally Posted by orangekea

Sure, "something converted to something else", I'd like to think of transformative processes, leading up to observable Space-Time.

We do not agree that duh this is creation, this is something you seem convinced of, even leaning into a 'self-evident' position? For act/process of 'Creating' I use first the dictionary definition: "to cause to come into existence". May have to refine this. Would mere interplay between chaos, physics laws and the changes in distribution, form of our Universe constitute a creation? How a about an absence of planning or intent to 'create'. Would it matter? I'm just throwing out some ideas for your consideration.

Here you are again going back and forth between whether we start from something existing or not existing. (BTW, started = originated = created = made.) And wouldn't something that didn't exist before be "nothing?" If you stay with your dictionary definition, you are back to something from nothing. Frankly, I'm disappointed. Still no progress. I thought we had come to some common ground that true creation is nothing more than the conversion of something to something different.

Furthermore, I see no reason to precondition the act of creation with the act of planning or of intention. I throw garbage in a heap. Over time, things decay and microorganisms munch away. Eventually, compost is created. No planning. No necesssary intent. No something from nothing. Yet compost is created. Yes?

Time for you to either $hit or get off the pot. If we can agree that creation is the conversion of something which exists to something different that also exists as the result of a conversion process, we are ready to move on. If not, I'm tired of your endless circles and will probably withdraw from the discussion. We are awfully far into this thread (which you CREATED) to not be able to agree on a simple definition for creating things.

I also have a problem with your term Evolution of Creative Processes. Neither the evolution of lifeless matter, nor of lifeforms has planning or intent toward higher complexity or consciousness. Just a sequence of changes imho. Most of these changes involve the loss of complexity, energy and existence. Humans and other succesful Earth life find themselves in a spot where everything worked toward their survival and supremacy, we are extremely complex/succesful organisms, maybe causing the illusion we have been created, and part of a creation.

Here is what I think your problem is. You are so entwined with the ancient terminology used between religionists and atheists referred to as the "creation versus evolution" argument that you have put blinders on as to how these words can be used in their broadest senses. You fail to see that garbage can create compost via an evolution of biochemical processes or that a God creator can invent physical laws and evolutionary life processes. Creation does not have to involve a God; nor does evolution automatically declare freedom from one.

I suggest you expand your thinking. Creation in the general sense means to begin, start or originate something new from something old. Example: use flour, sugar, eggs and heat to create a cake. Evolution is simply a path taken via a set of processes and selected options. Example: all the plays/results recorded chronologically in the last superbowl would comprise the evolution of that particular contest. The act of creating needs no god; and the evolution of something is not a defender of science. (There is certainly nothing especially scientific about how this thread has evolved which you created.)