One philosophical argument for existence of supernatural.

[sven]

So belief in objective value cannot be a product of nature? How so?

I'm not saying it can't be a product of nature, I'm saying having knowledge that there is such a thing cannot be simply a product of material forces with no supernatural involved. I already explained the reason, because, in evolution, we would've gained a sense of value and it would've worked without having knowledge of an actual value/worth.

Faith in objective value/praise existing to me can't be wrong. I know it to be true.

I'm arguing this knowledge on faith would not be knowledge were it the case of naturalism. Since it is knowledge, naturalism is not true.

I assume you mean that humanistic naturalism is 'not true'?

[Mystic]

I know it's not good to necro posts. But I think this is a very strong argument that I want to discuss again.

If naturalism is true, our concept of value and praise could not yield certainty in objective praise or value.

But if we claim to be certain of these things, it proves a supernatural origin.

[bennyboy]

I don't understand why you think this is a very strong argument.

[Pizza]

I don't understand why you think this is a very strong argument.

I'm not
P1 If objective value, then supernaturalism.
P2 Objective value.
P3. Supernaturalism.

The first premise is a based on black and white reasoning since naturalism and supernaturalism are not the only options. To name a few: ethical non-naturalism, quietism, "weak" agnosticism, and moral skepticism.

[Whateverist]

But if we claim to be certain of these things, it proves a supernatural origin.

If I claim to have a secret friend who is a giant, invisible rabbit does that also prove the supernatural? If so, it surprisingly easy.

[Dystopia]

1)In face of naturalism, our concept of ourselves and praise is not firmly grounded.

Why?

I think the first premise is false

[Esquilax]

How did you demonstrate... any of the initial premises of your argument, or even what you just said, MK?

[Faith No More]

I know it's not good to necro posts. But I think this is a very strong argument that I want to discuss again.

If naturalism is true, our concept of value and praise could not yield certainty in objective praise or value.

But if we claim to be certain of these things, it proves a supernatural origin.

How exactly are defining "praise?" The way you use it it sounds like it's some powerful thing that needs to be accounted for, but what makes you certain it's not just a human invention?

[Mystic]

1)In face of naturalism, our concept of ourselves and praise is not firmly grounded.

Why?

I think the first premise is false

Because in evolution, we would've gained it simply because it was beneficial to us without any bearing on whether we actually know it to be objective or not. Evolution would've just gave us a sense of praise without any bearing in a objective reality of praise, we would not know whether it's objective or not.

---

I know it's not good to necro posts. But I think this is a very strong argument that I want to discuss again.

If naturalism is true, our concept of value and praise could not yield certainty in objective praise or value.

But if we claim to be certain of these things, it proves a supernatural origin.

How exactly are defining "praise?" The way you use it it sounds like it's some powerful thing that needs to be accounted for, but what makes you certain it's not just a human invention?

I'm defining it as a positive value given to us or our actions, that has an objective positive value.

[Simon Moon]

Because in evolution, we would've gained it simply because it was beneficial to us without any bearing on whether we actually know it to be objective or not. Evolution would've just gave us a sense of praise without any bearing in a objective reality of praise, we would not know whether it's objective or not.

But what would make you even suspect in the first place that praise is objective? Why would praise exist objectively?

If there existed a universe identical to this one in every way, except that there were no conscious beings in it, would praise exist?

Praise is a perfectly explainable action within the evolutionary model for social animals.

I'm defining it as a positive value given to us or our actions, that has an objective positive value.

I don't understand why you define it that way?

Praise is just another way for conscious social animals to create a society that others of the same species want to live in and contribute to. There is nothing better to get members of society to make positive contributions than to their home, workplace, society, etc than receiving praise for their actions.