...when anybody talks about how things are decided in the universe then evolutionists start screeching that it is nonsense. So that knowledge about decisionmaking is out the window, and the subjectivity that comes with that.
Then I am not the typical "evolutionist" you have dealt with. So address this point toward those that do. Cease your straw man and red herring of my views as if such views are those you describe above. I have repeatedly told you that this is not the case.
Then for human beings and animals....evolutionists use a logic of sorting, selection, to mean choosing, where the result is simply forced by the sorting-criteria.
For genetic this logic works. No one chooses if they want red or blond hair as their natural colour. Certain reactions are basic instinct and unconsciousness processes. We can counter such instincts as flight or fight after the response. However the response is primed before we realize there was an event to respond to nor the response to the event. We do not choose the initial response, we choose to accept or veto the response already in action. We can choose not to breath as a veto of an automatic subconscious body function. However once we lose consciousness our choice is voided as the unconscious functions of the body.
Another example would be levels of attraction we have toward a member of the opposite sex. We have instinct driven fitness identification marks; age, physical and mental health, etc. However we also have subjective identification markers due to culture. In some sub-Saharan tribes physical attraction is based on how large the female is and how thin the male is. For western views the culture reinforces small and thin females as fit mates along with large muscular males. There is the factor of modesty, freedom of expression, religion. All are factors along with our evolutionary drives.
So you can see evolutionists suppress all knowledge about choosing. Which is not to say that evolution theory neccessarily suppresses it, because it doesn't.
No evolution accounts for many factors. Cultural and religion can be changes. People can change either thus choice is part of the equation behind evolution and it's effects on humans with other factors. Religion on the other hand provides no unified concept. Religion supported slavery, ritualized sacrifices of animals and humans, etc. It can not even provide a unified concept of morality or ethics. The choice was to follow the religious mandates or reject said mandates. Thus religions splinter or die. Acceptable ideas become taboo in the new religion. Later a taboo of the current religion faces a challenge leading to another split in religion, over and over. This is what social animals do which is part of evolutionary theory. Religious is merely the facade of the divine to motivate people to confirm for the benefit or society. At least until the society can not longer conform.
All addressed many times before. Reality is that evolution theory encroaches on and destroys all our knowledge about how things are chosen. Independent from evolution theory there is natural common discourse and religion in which freedom is regarded as a reality. That evolution theory is not succesful in totally obliterating all knowledge about choosing is because of these forces that oppose it, however, they still are fairly succesful in suppressing and destroying the knowledge to a significant extent
Only if you ignore the ability to reason while following a strict deterministic view of the theory as a worldview and metaphysical view. Such a view is not accepted by all thus you are arguing against a straw man of your own making.
