Wednesday, September 23, 2015


Never stop trying to dodge and deny this problem do you.

Let me explain a bit about how cause and effect works.  In order to get a specific effect the causes that led to that effect had to have produced that effect and only that effect.  You might not understand that effect in its entirety or how the antecedents produced that effect but if those antecedents produced some other effect cause and effect would be rather too chaotic to make reliable predictions of the sort scientists do and test.  Not to mention logic and math not working, at all.

First, there has to be a reason for the effect, in this case the atheist-materialist brain-only-brain (maybe we should call that the "AM BOB" to save time) would have had to have had a reason to make a new idea-structure.  It would have had to sense new information that would lead it to make what it is supposed to make.

Now, I wouldn't be surprised if some physical change happens in the brain when we have a new idea, though I doubt that's anything like what the idea really is.  The materialist claim that a physical structure is the reality, that the idea and the mind only a by-product of that physical structure, isn't the only way to look at that.  Meaningful words that someone writes aren't the ideas, the impression in clay, or wax or ink on animal skin or paper aren't the meaning, they aren't even the words, they certainly aren't ideas.  Until someone reliably interprets those marks, they are just marks.   The mind that wrote those words, those minds which came up with the systems of representation of words could also make a means of introducing those ideas into biology and that accounts for any changes in the brain.   The old fashioned assumption made by the critics dualism's model of the mind posed the problem of an immaterial mind having effects on the physical body.  That was held to be the conclusive point on which that model failed.  But they were insisting on treating the mind like a physical thing, an object or an energetic force.  There is no reason to believe that our minds are much of anything like physical objects or forces and it is quite possible that what they are, what kind of thing they are is not accessible in a way that physical forces acting on physical objects are.   The nature of physical causation was sufficiently subtle to be difficult to formalize scientifically, it is certainly nothing like a completed project or even one which is reasonably believed to be anything like nearly complete.

Those problems I pointed out, that there is no way to account for the specific antecedents that produce an accurate or even true idea have to be present in the actual, physical object which is the brain for the process to start and there is no way for that to be true if the brain is what makes the idea. That is a huge problem for materialism which, by the way, is also an idea which is just as ephemeral and insignificant as any other idea is under the materialist framing of reality.   It simply doesn't work. I will post those same problems of materialism every month unless someone comes up with the actual solution to that problem within materialist framing, where it must be answered for materialism to be true.  If you exit that framing to come up with a solution, then you've already conceded that materialism is a failure, you just don't realize that, yet.

I would say try again but you haven't even tried once.

Update:   I'm told that the Eschatots are engaged in competitive Chick Publications style Catholic bashing.  And water is reported to be wet.   Let's see, about 69.3 million Catholics in the United States, about 27 Eschatots, give or take a few occasional commentators plus those who are in the continuing process of being Heathered out of it.   Who do you imagine has some political clout?

No comments:

Post a Comment