The Argument From Consciousness

[Whateverist]

the only logic of an atheist is psuedo knowlege from wikpedia! Must atheist wouldn't even know what scientific proof is...let alone demanding it. How many took trig? Or pass chemistry class with an A average? Know how to do space-time calcs?

You sir are a dickless dick with nothing of any consequence to say and no clue as to what is being discussed. Please go away.

[Love]

For us to experience the phenomenon of consciousness, we need to be in the presence of time. This is logically true because for consciousness to work, it needs to actualise so that things such as emotions and thoughts can occur. Our experience of consciousness is quite literally a collective sequence of actions that we perform. All this can only happen if it's subject to time. Therefore, if we are experiencing consciousness, we must be in a temporal environment.

Interesting topic.

It seems as though you have used inductive reasoning to come to your conclusion, as something along the lines of:

1) Human beings exist inside time. (Premise)
2) All human beings are conscious. (Premise)
3) Therefore consciousness cannot exist without the presence of time. (Conclusion)

Although the premises are valid, the conclusion might not necessarily be true. Also, I can imagine that you assume consciousness emerges from human beings. Perhaps you think of it in following manner: consciousness emerges from the human brain, the human brain is a product of the process of evolution by natural selection, which ultimately evolved from the last universal common ancestor (probably something along the lines of a prokaryote­ cell) and is, thus, purely material in nature.

I think the key issue here is (what I perceive to be your) assumption that consciousness "emerges" from the human brain. I personally view this assumption to be somewhat unfounded. In science, we're not anywhere near close to having a consensus on how to define consciousness, and even Richard Dawkins admitted this in an interview (I could provide a link to it if you wish); he even invoked philosophy, which I found quite surprising and interesting. With this in mind, I believe that you have come to a hasty conclusion by asserting that consciousness cannot exist without the presence of time.

[Neo-Scholastic]

Specifically speaking, Chad Wooters. He requested me to write this up.

Indeed, I asked you to start this thread so I’m sorry about coming late to the party. Your argument has makes me think about consciousness and God in ways I had not previously considered. The terms ‘God’ and ‘consciousness’ are ambiguous at best, and that is why I think it makes for such and interesting problem.

Of course my first question is about consciousness. When we say that God is a conscious being of what is He conscious? Do the contents of His consciousness change like ours? Does God have an unconscious part of His intellect?

The second thing I ponder is if time is the only field of action for consciousness, time being only one metric of extension. A graph with an x-axis of God's anger and a y-axis of Man's disobedience would show a change relationship without any reference to time. But intuitively I agree time and consciousness seem go hand-in-hand.

[FallentoReason]

Specifically speaking, Chad Wooters. He requested me to write this up.

Indeed, I asked you to start this thread so I’m sorry about coming late to the party. Your argument has makes me think about consciousness and God in ways I had not previously considered. The terms ‘God’ and ‘consciousness’ are ambiguous at best, and that is why I think it makes for such and interesting problem.

Agreed. When I first thought of this, I sort of took a lot for granted as "common knowledge", but some people (including yourself obviously) have rightly pointed out that perhaps there's some work I ought to do there to establish a more concrete meaning of those words.

Of course my first question is about consciousness. When we say that God is a conscious being of what is He conscious? Do the contents of His consciousness change like ours? Does God have an unconscious part of His intellect?

I'm somewhat inclined to believe that the theist will be closer to knowing how to answer these questions than myself. Surely the Bible hints at possible answers.

The second thing I ponder is if time is the only field of action for consciousness, time being only one metric of extension. A graph with an x-axis of God's anger and a y-axis of Man's disobedience would show a change relationship without any reference to time. But intuitively I agree time and consciousness seem go hand-in-hand.

That's an interesting thought. I don't know if this is entirely accurate, but wouldn't such a "mechanical" relationship almost partly rob God of his free will? My initial thought would be that the x axis (the independent variable) would actually be man's disobedience, because we have been granted free will i.e. our actions are independent of anything (as opposed to, say, determinism which would mean our actions are in one way or another dependent on something else). Therefore, God's anger would be the dependent variable which would fluctuate according to what we do. So in a way, he knew that his emotions would be out of his control as soon as humanity was created. Or it's as if he never was actually conscious but is simply a "materialistic" construct that reacts to certain things e.g. our behaviour, much like chemicals. Or maybe... my deep involvement with graphs and science (academically speaking) don't allow me to divorce the notion of a graph and the context it is usually in!

[Neo-Scholastic]

When we say that God is a conscious being of what is He conscious? Do the contents of His consciousness change like ours? Does God have an unconscious part of His intellect?

I'm somewhat inclined to believe that the theist will be closer to knowing how to answer these questions than myself. Surely the Bible hints at possible answers.

I doubt many have thought about it. Dilemmas like this, including the Trinity & hypostatic union, moved me toward Swedenborg. Not that he had all the answers either.

...wouldn't such a "mechanical" relationship almost partly rob God of his free will?

On first blush it would seem so. I tend to think of this graph more as Man's experience of God. God's love is a constant force which you experience as His wrath when you disobey. Not that that entirely solves the problem either, although it is an avenue to explore.