It's a God Theory

[Rayaan]

So you're saying that life cannot form by a long process consistent with our empirical foundation, but can exist spontaneously without creation from the beginning of time?

I didn't say that life on earth cannot form by a long process that is consistent with our empirical foundations. My point was that the source of our life is something which is already alive itself (which is God), because to me it seems impossible that inanimate matter can organize itself into a living thing without a greater intelligence operating behind the laws of nature (even after knowing how evolution works).

And a non-physical mind has no explanatory virtue, you might as well say *poof magic* did it.

Maybe the mind is not physical after all, then, But I strongly feel that there is a mind behind the universe regardless of whether it is physical or not.

Also, it's not the same thing as saying *poof magic* did it because the belief in such a mind is an inference that many people have based on the the amount of complexity and self-organization that they see in living things and the geological structure of this planet. I know that there are other scientists and thinkers who share the same view of the existence of a universal mind. For example, a physicist named Paul Davies argues in his book titled The Mind of God that the reflective power of the human mind cannot be something which is a by-product of "mindless, purposeless" forces (Davies, 232).

Similarly, Freeman Dyson wrote in his book titled The Disturbed Universe, "I do not claim that the architecture of the universe proves the existence of God. I claim only that the architecture of the universe is consistent with the hypothesis that mind plays an essential role in its functioning" (Dyson, 251).

No, it's Bare Assertion #3

I used philosophical inductive reasoning, the sort of thing which is not obligated to be placed in control groups, subject to repeated observed experiments, reviewed by professional peers, or fall under any of the guidelines of the scientific method. So, this means that this is a proof by argument, not evidence.

That's why I don't agree with you that what I wrote are nothing but "bare assertions" as you labelled them.

Since you're asking me for a back up, here are some quotes:

Most importantly, spin as a "protopsychic" process, should be self-referential. Such requirement of spin is well supported by Hofstadter (1979)’ s view of what is at the crux of consciousness. According to Hofstadter, consciousness is based on a kind of self-reference that he termed as a "strange loop" and further explained as an interaction between levels in which the top level reaches back down towards the bottom level influencing it, while at the same time being itself determined by the bottom level.

Penrose-Hameroff’ s self-organized objective reduction model of spacetime geometry (Hameroff and Penrose, 1996) also implies that the spacetime dynamcs is driving by certain self-referential process. In addition, Cahill’ s work on a self-referentially limited neural-network model of reality (Cahill, 2002) supports the view of a primordial self-referential network underlying reality. These results lend further support to our fundamental view that spin is a primordial self-referential process driving quantum mechanics, spacetime dynamics and consciousness.

Source: http://cogprints.org/2827/1/SpinNature.pdf

It's a perfect demonstration of bad reasoning.

Why is it bad reasoning?

Here are two more quotes. The first one is an idea which argues that self-awareness is a particular type of self-reference:

According to Hofstadter, self-awareness, the quality of having a "soul," a "self," an "I," is itself the result of a particular kind of self-reference in the "programming" of the human mind. This special self-reference, which he calls the "Strange Loop," is information that references itself, but in such a way as to bring in new information before referencing itself again.- Full Article

Likewise, there is a possibility that reality is also self-referential in a similar way to human consciousness (thus making it self-aware):

This new physics is emerging from a radically different comprehension of the nature of reality, namely that of a self-referential information system, where the information is semantic and active, that is, information that has meaning in the system itself, and because of that the system evolves in a manner determined by that meaning, and so is experienced by the system. This amounts to the assertion that reality is self-aware at all levels, though clearly that self-awareness is of a very limited form in most systems, but is there even at the level of quantum matter. - Full Article

And even if your premises are true and your conclusion follows, how the fuck did you get to "personal god"

Because if it is true that there is a greater intelligence, or a mind, behind the creation of rationalizing animals in this planet, then it also follows that there is a reason for our existence. Why? Because a powerful and a functional mind would operate within the bounds of Reason.

And personally, I think that the existence of Reason is in a greater harmony with the view of a personal God (as opposed to an impersonal God).