I understand your analogy, but I'd like to understand the point behind your analogy. Would you be able to extend your analogy with a brief explanation? Or is i

I understand your analogy, but I'd like to understand the point behind your analogy. Would you be able to extend your analogy with a brief explanation? Or is it /s to the point that I perhaps failed to explicitly explain the relevance of my comment to the parent comment? If so, I apologize. The parent comment said "The mechanics of an omnipotent being are infinitely more complex than evolution" and the point of the house analogy was to argue that it's based on viewpoint. The house may think that the mechanics of the human are infinitely more complex (i.e. the wiring of the house barely compares to a handful of neurons from the human), but from the perspective of the human there is nothing complex about the interaction. For the house to be self-bootstrapping from just soup would be curious and highly unlikely from their POV. As a human our reasoning ability is influenced by our viewpoint (and that's not to say any one viewpoint is right or wrong), so we should always play devils advocate with the razor.