Argument against atheism

[amkerman]

darwinning, if consciousness is an emergent function of complex systems, it is not a property of the universe, but just something that can be found within the universe, like snowflakes. But holding such a belief necessitates that you don't actually believe snowflakes exist outside of your own mind. You argue for a physical universe that give rise to non-physical phenomenom. You admit that these non phyiscal phenomena are the only means humanity has to percieve physical reality, but that the non-physical phnomena do not exist apart from the idea that they arise from interaction of physical forces. If that is true then nothing we percieve consciously atually exists apart from our ideas about what consciousness is "some interaction of physical forces". If something does not exist apart from our ideas of what it is, it is not real. If we believe consciousness is not real, we can not believe that observations made through consciousness are. While you could believe there are physical forces acting in the universe that gives rise to conscious thought, it would be illogical to hold any belief about what those forces were. all physical forces are observations of a conscious mind, that consciousness you don't believe to exist apart from your idea of it, so it is not real. If it is not real, then the observations made by through consciousness can not be believed to be real either. Snowflakes then exist only in your conscious mind. While something that resembles a snowflake may or may not actually exist in the pysical world, any belief that such is true is based solely on something which you describe doesn't actually exist as inherent to the universe.