(August 30, 2026 at 6:12 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: I'm not interested in being your boyfriends boyfriend.
Again...the problem you simply offering this theodicy up creates is that you're acknowledging that the world does indeed look like it would under what you call an atheistic reductionism.
Just like above, you've now explained that you don't think it's a problem if god and panpsychism don't explain consciousness....thus I fail to see why it would be a problem if "atheistic reductionism" also failed to explain it?
"You're acknowledging that the world does indeed look like it would under what you call an atheistic reductionism." No, maybe an atheistic panpsychism. An atheistic reductionism cannot even accomplish Natural Selection, for reasons I gave (not to mention self-awareness).
"Just like above, you've now explained that you don't think it's a problem if god and panpsychism don't explain consciousness....thus I fail to see why it would be a problem if "atheistic reductionism" also failed to explain it?" Here's you're missing the point. Panpsychism explains it as an innate property. It's a question of how you are using the term "explain". I think you are equivocating.
