no empirical evidence mind reduces to brain

Discuss arguments for existence of God and faith in general. Any aspect of any orientation toward religion/spirituality, as long as it is based upon a positive open to other people attitude.

Moderator: Metacrock

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 10046
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

no empirical evidence mind reduces to brain

Post by Metacrock » Fri Aug 21, 2015 7:25 am

Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

Superfund
Posts: 237
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:33 am

Re: no empirical evidence mijnd reduces to brain

Post by Superfund » Mon Aug 24, 2015 7:33 pm

Hey Joe,
That is an interesting link and I plan to read again as i'm reading about exactley that topic at the moment. I'm at work so I figured I may as well bash out a paragraph of what i'm reading that might be of interest here. (David Bentley Hart - "Being Consciousness Bliss")

"For one thing-and this is no small matter-considered solely within the conceptual paradigms we have inherited from the mechanical philosophy, it is something of a conundrum that such a thing as consciousness should be possible for material beings at all. Absolutely central to the mechanistic vision of reality is the principle that material forces are inherently mindless, intrinsically devoid of purpose, and therefore only adventitiously and accidentally directed towards any end. Complex rational organization, so we are told, is not a property naturally residing in material reality, but is only a state imposed upon material reality whenever matter is assumed into composite structures whose essentially disparate parts, as a result of design or chance, operate together in some kind of functional order. Nothing within the material constituents of those structures has the least innate tendency toward such order, any more than the material elements from which a watch is composed have any innate tendency towards horology. And, if complex rational order is extrinsic to what matter essentially is, how much more so must rationality itself be; for consciousness would appear to be everything that, according to the principles of mechanism, matter is not: directed, purposive, essentially rational. The notion that material causes could yield a result so apparently contrary to material nature is paradoxical enough that it ought to give even the most convinced materialists pause."

Btw I got ToG and have started reading (the intro so far) and it looks great. All those people that did all that research.. facinating stuff.

/peace

User avatar
QuantumTroll
Posts: 1073
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 5:54 am
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Contact:

Re: no empirical evidence mijnd reduces to brain

Post by QuantumTroll » Tue Aug 25, 2015 7:18 am

I don't have much to say about the link in the top post. There's no empirical evidence either way, "just" philosophy.

Part of Superfund's quote, however, caught my interest.
[Complex rational organization is when] essentially disparate parts, as a result of design or chance, operate together in some kind of functional order. Nothing within the material constituents of those structures has the least innate tendency toward such order, any more than the material elements from which a watch is composed have any innate tendency towards horology.
David Bentley Hart is missing something important here. In the first sentence I quoted, he implies that parts that operate together in a functional order do so only because of either design or chance, ignoring self-organised order which is neither design nor chance. In a perfect contradiction with the second sentence, self-organised order does arise from an innate tendency toward order in the material constituents.

He is right in that the components of a watch don't self-assemble into a time piece. On the other hand, when poured into salty water certain lipids will self-assemble into cell-like bubbles with membranes that behave just like a living cell. This is just the simplest example, but the natural world is full of more complex phenomena like this, where order grows out of individually disordered components — all kinds of ant's nests, weather patterns, ecological relationships, etc. The widespread existence of such phenomena seriously calls into question the author's conclusion that complex rational order is contrary to material nature, as well as his further conclusion that the notion of consciousness having a material origin is paradoxical.

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 10046
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: no empirical evidence mijnd reduces to brain

Post by Metacrock » Tue Aug 25, 2015 11:42 am

you are arguing with an analogy we can always change analogies.

sorry there is empirical evidence against irreduceability. I put that link up :mrgreen:
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

User avatar
QuantumTroll
Posts: 1073
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 5:54 am
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Contact:

Re: no empirical evidence mijnd reduces to brain

Post by QuantumTroll » Wed Aug 26, 2015 2:19 am

Metacrock wrote:you are arguing with an analogy we can always change analogies.
No, that isn't an analogy at all. Complex self-organised structures happen all the time. Life itself is a tremendously complex self-organised structure. David Bentley Hart either didn't realise or plumb forgot, and it shoots a hole right through the argument he made in that quote.
sorry there is empirical evidence against irreduceability. I put that link up :mrgreen:
Yeah, I think you're interpreting things wrongly, but I'll deal with that in its own thread.

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 10046
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: no empirical evidence mijnd reduces to brain

Post by Metacrock » Wed Aug 26, 2015 3:07 am

QuantumTroll wrote:
Metacrock wrote:you are arguing with an analogy we can always change analogies.
No, that isn't an analogy at all. Complex self-organised structures happen all the time. Life itself is a tremendously complex self-organised structure. David Bentley Hart either didn't realise or plumb forgot, and it shoots a hole right through the argument he made in that quote.
is one of them a watch? that's the analogy.
sorry there is empirical evidence against irreduceability. I put that link up :mrgreen:
Yeah, I think you're interpreting things wrongly, but I'll deal with that in its own thread.[/quote]

what things? I am starting to think we are not as far apart as you might think. I realize your views can't be given a guilt by association trip and are not to be compared with those of carm crowd.
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

User avatar
QuantumTroll
Posts: 1073
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 5:54 am
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Contact:

Re: no empirical evidence mijnd reduces to brain

Post by QuantumTroll » Wed Aug 26, 2015 3:29 am

Metacrock wrote:
QuantumTroll wrote:
Metacrock wrote:you are arguing with an analogy we can always change analogies.
No, that isn't an analogy at all. Complex self-organised structures happen all the time. Life itself is a tremendously complex self-organised structure. David Bentley Hart either didn't realise or plumb forgot, and it shoots a hole right through the argument he made in that quote.
is one of them a watch? that's the analogy.
That wasn't my analogy, man. That was in a quote of David Bentley Hart that Superfund put up.
I am starting to think we are not as far apart as you might think.
Yes! I know we are not. That's what I'm trying to get you to realise :)

Jim B.
Posts: 1445
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 2:36 am

Re: no empirical evidence mijnd reduces to brain

Post by Jim B. » Wed Aug 26, 2015 12:12 pm

QuantumTroll wrote: Yes! I know we are not. That's what I'm trying to get you to realise :)
We agree, damn it! ;) We're all arguing for irreducibility, tho slightly different versions of it. The big divide is that QT, I think, would be something like an emergent property dualist whereas Joe and I tend towards something else like substance dualism or dual aspect.

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 10046
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: no empirical evidence mijnd reduces to brain

Post by Metacrock » Wed Aug 26, 2015 3:16 pm

Jim B. wrote:
QuantumTroll wrote: Yes! I know we are not. That's what I'm trying to get you to realise :)
We agree, damn it! ;) We're all arguing for irreducibility, tho slightly different versions of it. The big divide is that QT, I think, would be something like an emergent property dualist whereas Joe and I tend towards something else like substance dualism or dual aspect.
fair enough
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

User avatar
sgttomas
Posts: 2424
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 5:20 am

Re: no empirical evidence mijnd reduces to brain

Post by sgttomas » Sat Oct 10, 2015 10:48 pm

QuantumTroll wrote:Life itself is a tremendously complex self-organised structure.
....we assume
Prophet Muhammad (God send peace and blessings upon him) is reported to have said, "God says 'I am as My servant thinks I am' " ~ Sahih Al-Bukhari, Vol 9 #502 (Chapter 93, "Oneness of God")

Post Reply