(February 3, 2013 at 5:04 pm)fr0d0 Wrote:I have no need to address timelessness, unless you can demonstrate why it is pivotal to the argument. It seems a red herring to me, but if you can clearly demonstrate why it is pivotal I am all ears. Your point about non-physicalism is just wrong. I am addressing theism directly on it's own terms and referencing a disembodied consciousness (which would appear to me to tick all boxes as being non-physical). My own views on what consciousness is, are not relevant as we can both agree consciousness exists without agreeing why it exists.(February 3, 2013 at 3:58 pm)Captain Scarlet Wrote: It [theism] is committed to the primacy of consciousness given it's reliance on a disembodied consciousness being able to causally interact with reality and / or even cause reality at all, ie Theism claims that existence does not exist without said consciousness. The primacy of consciousness is demonstrably false. Ergo Theism is false, ergo god/s do or can not exist.Firstly, please demonstrate the falseness of the primacy of consciousness.
Secondly, please demonstrate the impossibility of timelessness.
Theism addresses the non physical realm, which is what you limit your objection to. Therefore your conclusion doesn't address theism.
So to what you are really asking - the primacy of existence is self evident requiring no proof. To deny existence, exists is a contradiction. But to help you understand the logical structure of why it is axiomatic explore the other perspective. Consider the proposition that the primacy of consciousness is true. To make that claim, you are making a claim about not only consciousness but also the nature of reality and you are also asserting the primacy of existence is false. The person making the claim intends to have the claim taken seriously, such that they are revealing objective facts about reality. However asserting that the primacy of existence is false renders facts about reality as subjective to whims of the thoughts of beings. Thus it refutes itself.
Thus if the primacy of existence is true, the primacy of consciousness is false and because theism is committed to the latter, Theism is necessarily false and gods can not and do not exist. To dismantle this argument you should not invoke red herrings such as timelessness (which is the subject of quite a different discussion). Instead address the argument on its own terms by either demonstrating that the primacy of consciousness is true or demonstrating why theism is not committed to it (without reverting to the ad-hoc rationalisation nor to special pleading). Imagining something exists does not make it so, reality does not conform to our thoughts, our musings are not instantiated into existence whether we wish them to be or not. Existence is an absolute and stands freely objective of consciousness.
"I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence"...Doug McLeod.