Open challenge regarding the supernatural

[robvalue]

I have to agree that the problem of conciousness is a very unique one. We are analysing the equipment we use to analyse. It's extremely difficult, and I agree, you just can't get around it very easily.

Whether or not it is "supernatural"... I don't know. Again, like you say, it's about definitions. If we define what "qualia" is but then cannot directly demonstrate it to be anything other than an abstract idea, then we haven't established there actually is someing there to be supernatural.

Say, for the sake or argument, that qualia are the emergent property and it "appears" to manifest in certain ways. But if it's actually not manifesting at all in any real sense, then... nothing is there. Picking the right language for this is so difficult!

I have wondered a lot about whether what we perceive as qualia and consciousness is at all unique to life forms. I don't see why it would be. It's just we have absolutely no way of detecting any such things going on in a rock, for example. But maybe that will change! This is my concern with the supernatural label, we assume the things could never be measured and witnessed independently. We can't witness ourselves independent or reliably, but if we could somehow interpret the qualia/emergent properties from anything in an empirical way, then maybe we could analyse them.

Maybe one day we will be able to somehow measure the actual conciousness someone is experiencing, some way of directly transferring that experience to someone else. I have no idea how.

My analysis is totally inadequate, I know. I think this is the most baffling subject we will ever meet and one we may not ever solve. The best I can come up with is that conciousness is a "side effect" of a working brain. It appears to manifest itself in some way that seems real. But trying to say what is real and what is not... brain meltdown.

So I'll totally agree this is the nearest thing to "supernatural" but I feel like actually saying that it is supernatural may be an overstatement. We really don't understand it properly, at all. We're making very vague stabs in the dark at it. We can't yet objectively measure it as a shared experience, but maybe one day we will. We also can't demonstrate that anything is actually going on beyond the physical; so to call something we haven't demonstrated to be real supernatural seems premature. So that's my two objections: is there anything going on at all, and how can we know we could never measure it if so?

Thanks for the very interesting discussion! I hope it will continue. This is a fascinating subject.

Also, I notice no one is bringing any other challenges for me. Feel free to copy and paste arguments you've made (theistic ones if you like) from other threads that you think are sound. This is me backing up my claim that apologetics is dishonesty. Bring it hither and I'll thither it. Or forever hold your peace.