If I was to set to prove we have a perpetual identity, I would have to prove the supernatural exists (from my perspective). But I am out to prove naturalism false, but, it takes belief in two assumptions: 1) If naturalism true, most of humanity would not have knowledge of having a perpetual identity. 2) Most of humanity does have knowledge of having a perpetual identity.
As I stated, these can't be proven by debate, but I feel most people will be convinced of axiom 2, and axiom 1 can be argued for or even recognized directly. But axiom 2 cannot be falsified simply by asserting naturalism to be true.
As I stated, these can't be proven by debate, but I feel most people will be convinced of axiom 2, and axiom 1 can be argued for or even recognized directly. But axiom 2 cannot be falsified simply by asserting naturalism to be true.
