RE: Can Consciousness Best Be Explained by God's Existence?
March 31, 2014 at 11:03 am
(March 31, 2014 at 12:29 am)whateverist Wrote: To say that a thing is natural is one and the same with saying it is real or exists.
I think this plays on semantics. Today psi phenomena are considered supernatural. If somehow, it was confirmed (something that hasn't been convincing yet) then you would shift it into the natural column. If that is the definition then I guess I'm a naturalist too. I just have a more expansive concept of what is real and existing.
(March 31, 2014 at 12:29 am)whateverist Wrote: That isn't really a sincere criticism if you yourself don't require falsifiability of your own approach.
You are right. My comment is directed at those who lay everything at the feet of science. Not every important question is subject to the same tools by which we understand the natural, i.e. material world. Philosophical questions are an order higher than scientific ones. There we look for internal consistency and conformance with experience. As for me, I concluded some time ago that ontological nihilism was incoherent and logically excludes subjective reality.
(March 31, 2014 at 12:29 am)whateverist Wrote: ...to say that natural accounts are not yet adequate is not in itself a point in favor of theological accounts. To explain one mystery in terms of another is no explanation at all.
I completely agree. That is why I do not form my opinions based solely on unsupported opinion. Intentionality is a real phenomena and must have a place in any coherent philosophy of mind. It's not that a naturalistic solution hasn't yet been found; ontological naturalism as a paradigm disallows it. I agree than just throwing around the word God does little to further our understanding. You will notice how I never use the word myself when discussing this issue, because I think the issue is about the fundamental nature of reality: whether its Whiteheads 'monads' or as I suspect a unified ground of being that also has dispositional properties.
