Intelligent Design Mind Naturalism

Michael Egnor: How can mind interact with matter?

Spread the love

Nature itself, he says, provides examples of how the immaterial interacts with the material:

Nature is pervaded by immaterial forms like chirality that determine the properties of matter. This interaction is well recognized in science. It is in this sense that spirit and matter can and do interact.

A simple example from chemistry will help: It is the property of certain things to exist as mirror images of each other; my right and left hand are an obvious example. From the standpoint of matter, my hands are identical. They have the same bones, muscles and nerves. What makes them different is their form. My right hand is a mirror image of my left hand. That is, it is the form alone—the organization of my hand—that makes the difference, rather than the matter of which my hand (right or left) is composed. Michael Egnor, “How can mind interact with matter?” at Mind Matters News


More by Michael Egnor on the interactions of mind and body:

Four researchers whose work sheds light on the reality of the mind The brain can be cut in half, but the intellect and will cannot, says Michael Egnor. The intellect and will are metaphysically simple.

Atheist psychiatrist misunderstands evidence for an immaterial mind Patients with massive brain damage were shown to have a mental life

and

A materialist neuroscientist continues the argument with himself. On the topic of “intellectual seizures,” he seems committed to both points of view

How can mind interact with matter?

28 Replies to “Michael Egnor: How can mind interact with matter?

  1. 1
    Latemarch says:

    I have just a little trouble with this example. If two things are identical then you should be able to exchange them without effect. It’s not true of chirality or hands.
    Maybe I’m looking at this wrong. Any help out there?

  2. 2
    Pater Kimbridge says:

    So the shape of something is immaterial?
    But you can’t have the shape without having the material to begin with.
    This guy is nuts.

  3. 3
    Latemarch says:

    Peter@2

    So the shape of something is immaterial?
    But you can’t have the shape without having the material to begin with.

    Shape can be immaterial. Octagon is a shape and immaterial.
    What I’m having trouble with is maintaining that something with a different chirality or mirror image being an identical shape or form.

  4. 4
    Silver Asiatic says:

    What I’m having trouble with is maintaining that something with a different chirality or mirror image being an identical shape or form

    I think what he’s saying is that the material is exactly the same: bones, joints, fingers, thumbs, nails. But they’re organized as mirror images. So the material does not dictate the form. I think he’s speaking of “form” in the philosophical sense. A triangle is an immaterial form (shape or pattern). Plato believed forms existed in a separate immaterial world – but where is that world and how did it get there? Aristotle believed they existed in the immaterial mind (we can think of a triangle) – but how did they get into human minds? Aquinas believed forms exist in the divine mind. That is the most reasonable explanation for the existence of immaterial forms. So, I think Dr. Egnor is saying that nature is aligned with immaterial forms (patterns) which are not determined by the material, which in the case of chirality is identical but a mirror-reverse.

  5. 5
    Latemarch says:

    SA@4
    Egnor said: “From the standpoint of matter, my hands are identical.”

    But my hands have different forms, an immaterial has been imposed on the matter, so they are no longer identical. They are not interchangeable. You used the term “organized” but this would seem to me to be a material thing.
    I’m probably not expressing this very well.

  6. 6
    Silver Asiatic says:

    Latemarch
    When he’s talking about the “form”, I think he’s talking about how the material is organized to fit a pattern. What he is saying that is identical in hands are the various parts. So, in theory you could transplant a right index finger on a left hand. But you’re right, to say they’re identical would not be true. I guess he means “identical except they’re in reverse”. So, the mirror opposite uses the same “form” basically. The hand is the same in shape and function, with the same parts. When you hold one hand up against the other they match, thumb to thumb, finger to finger, etc.

  7. 7
    Latemarch says:

    SA:
    Yeah, I think that I just got hung up on the word “identical.”
    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

  8. 8
    awstar says:

    Egnor:

    Nature is pervaded by immaterial forms like chirality that determine the properties of matter. This interaction is well recognized in science. It is in this sense that spirit and matter can and do interact.

    Is “triangle” of matter or of spirit?
    Is “mind” of matter or of spirit?
    Is “charge” of matter or of spirit?
    Is “energy” of matter or of spirit?
    Is “force” of matter or of spirit?
    Is a “word” of matter or of spirit?

    If we discover that matter turns out to be just spherical standing waves in an ocean of aether which itself is only virtual, not material, then matter too would be of spirit.

    It’s spirit all the way down to — (guess Who?)

    The Word

    In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. John 1:1-3

    But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. 1 Corinthians 8:6

    For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. Colossians 1:16-17

    Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; Hebrews 1:2

  9. 9
    Ed George says:

    His argument went off the rails in his first sentence.

    Nature is pervaded by immaterial forms like chirality that determine the properties of matter.

    In what universe is chirality not material?

  10. 10
    ET says:

    Ed George:

    In what universe is chirality not material?

    OK then- make your case. Asking a question does nothing. Or you could even email him and ask your question to them man himself.

  11. 11
    Ed George says:

    Latemarch

    Maybe I’m looking at this wrong. Any help out there?

    I think that he is ascribing some power to chirality, a human way to describe the shape of molecules, that it doesn’t have. Both the left and right handed compounds have their own, and often different, properties. Based on what we know about chemistry and physics, we would expect this.

    We use many words to describe chemical compounds, things like isomer, hydrocarbon, polymer, polar, etc. While these words may be immaterial in nature, they have no power on their own; they don’t interact with the material other than to convey the nature of a molecule from one human to another.

  12. 12
    ET says:

    Oh my. Acartia Eddie would rather erect a strawman than to ask Dr. Egnor.

  13. 13
    Latemarch says:

    EG:
    Thanks for the reply.
    My latest grand-daughter has a toy. It’s a vaguely spherical ball with holes of various shapes that accommodate similarly shaped injection molded blocks. One of the holes is an approximation of an equilateral triangle. The concept of equilateral triangle is immaterial. It is dimensionless only requiring the sides to be the same length. It is not bound by time nor entropy. Yet it has no power (as you put it) to form the hole in the sphere. That took a designer, using the immaterial concept to form the injection mold resulting in the equilateral triangle shaped hole in the sphere.
    The hole in the sphere is contingent while the concept is necessary as was the designer.

    I think that I now understand where Dr. Egnor was going with his example. It could have been more carefully constructed so as to not use the term “identical.” Right and left handed molecules let alone right and left hands are not identical. However I now think that I understand how the concept of chirality is immaterial. Dimensionless, not bound by the material that adheres to the concept and unbounded by time. The concept is necessary while the molecule is contingent. Again a designer is required (necessary).

    ET:
    Yes, Ed had made a strawman although I wonder if he knew that was what he was doing. It was what he said in his reply to me that helped clarify the problem for me.

    Ed George @11 said: While these words may be immaterial in nature, they have no power on their own;….

    Of course they have no power on their own! They require a designer to implement.

  14. 14
    Ed George says:

    Latemarch

    Of course they have no power on their own! They require a designer to implement.

    Salt crystals have a shape that we have described (cubic). But they are not designed. Just because compounds often have differing shapes that we can describe (eg, the benzene ring in the boat and chair arrangement) or a left and right arrangement (eg, vitamin C) that we describe as chirality, does not mean that a designer is necessary. We know that both salt crystals and benzene can form “naturally.

    Remember, Egnor’s claim was that something like chirality “interacted” with the material, which is manifestly not true in this case. Chirality is just how we describe what we see.

  15. 15
    ET says:

    What Dr Egnor is saying is two molecules with the identical chemistry can have different forms. The organization makes the difference. And that organization isn’t reducible to materialistic processes

  16. 16
    Latemarch says:

    Ed George @14:
    Salt is cubic only under certain conditions. Salt is also potentially a liquid or even a gas. It becomes a liquid if we apply heat. It was acted on by the addition of heat and is now a liquid. Salt is only cubic when acted on in certain fashions. The same is true of chiral molecules. Most reactions produce mixtures of R and L but if you change the parameters or add certain catalysts you can often select for the production of one form or the other. The molecule has the potential to be either but when acted on can be selected. Notice in the above that it’s not just R or L that is the molecule nor is it just chemicals that make the molecule but the combination that make it what it is.

    Dr. Egnor is advocating for a philosophical position called hylemorphism (sometime spelled hylomorphism) from the Greek hyle=matter and morphe=form. The molecule is not just its matter because it could be in different forms (see salt above) and its not just its form (solid, liquid, or gas) which by itself is not the salt. It is the combination of material and immaterial (matter and form) that makes it what it is.

    Notice that salt in whatever form we find it got to that form through a long chain of events. According to the standard cosmology early on there was only Hydrogen (earlier not even that). You don’t get to a particular matter and form unless there is an outside act. Every effect has its cause and eventually you have to have an initial cause.

  17. 17
    Silver Asiatic says:

    The matter fits a certain form or pattern. The form, like a triangle, for example, is an immaterial entity that we abstract from the observation. The form or organization exists but it is not created by the material since the material (matter) is limited by it. The matter could have taken any number and variety of organized patterns, but it is bound to certain ones. The form or organization interacts with the matter by giving it shape. The abstract, immaterial form of a cube or triangle interacts with matter causing the matter to be observed in that form. The form or organization or pattern is independent of the matter – it is an immaterial entity. Plato taught that such forms exist in their own separate world. Aristotle taught that they exist in the rational mind. But rational minds are contingent – they received forms from a First Cause.

    Dr. Egnor – Nature is pervaded by immaterial forms like chirality that determine the properties of matter. This interaction is well recognized in science. It is in this sense that spirit and matter can and do interact. A simple example from chemistry will help: It is the property of certain things to exist as mirror images of each other; my right and left hand are an obvious example. From the standpoint of matter, my hands are identical.

    The matter is identical. The immaterial organization or arrangement (form) is what makes them different. That’s how the immaterial (spirit as he calls it) interacts with matter.

  18. 18
    ET says:

    From Dr Egnor’s article:

    From the hylemorphic perspective—the one I take—matter and spirit interact in the same sense that matter and form interact. Form is the organizational principle–the intelligible principle–behind the thing. Matter is what individuates something. Form is what makes it real rather than potential. Form determines the properties of matter.

    The difference between the smell of oranges and of lemons is due to chirality. The molecule—limonene—smells like lemon or orange according to its chirality alone—to its form, not to its matter.

    But anyway, mind interacts with matter due to some form of entanglement. This would start with the infusion of the spirit into the developing body. And it would continue until you stop developing, physically and spiritually.`

  19. 19
    bornagain77 says:

    Latemarch states,

    My latest grand-daughter has a toy. It’s a vaguely spherical ball with holes of various shapes that accommodate similarly shaped injection molded blocks. One of the holes is an approximation of an equilateral triangle. The concept of equilateral triangle is immaterial. It is dimensionless only requiring the sides to be the same length. It is not bound by time nor entropy. Yet it has no power (as you put it) to form the hole in the sphere. That took a designer, using the immaterial concept to form the injection mold resulting in the equilateral triangle shaped hole in the sphere.
    The hole in the sphere is contingent while the concept is necessary as was the designer.

    Beautifully put!

    As to Dr. Egnor’s claim,

    Nature is pervaded by immaterial forms

    Indeed, the inability of ‘bottom up’ materialistic processes to explain the various ‘top down’ forms found for the universe, and in universe, is a pervasive problem. A pervsive problem for reductive materialism that can found in physics as well as in molecular biology.

    For example the ‘form’ of the golden ratio is found throughout nature and has often been referred to as ‘the fingerprint of God’:

    To get this point across, Cristóbal Vila made this very inspirational video 10 years ago,,,

    Nature by Numbers – video
    https://vimeo.com/9953368

    ,,, As well, Cristóbal Vila has this fairly new, and very inspirational, animation up now that was uploaded just 4 months ago

    Infinite Patterns – video
    https://vimeo.com/354924827

    Along that same ‘golden ratio’ line of thought

    Number theory and the unity of science – 2014
    Excerpt: We suggest that there is a strong case that this so-called ‘Golden Ratio’ (1.61803…) can be related not only to aspects of mathematics but also to physics, chemistry, biology and the topology of space-time.1
    A convincing case for assuming a cosmic character of the Golden Ratio can be made based on the ubiquity of logarithmic spirals. Spectacular examples include the Whirlpool Galaxy (M51), ammonites, the shape of Nautilus shells, Hurricane Katrina and the distribution of planets, moons, asteroids and rings in the solar system (Figure 1). The logarithmic spiral is firmly related to the Fibonacci series and the Golden Ratio of number theory. A familiar aspect of Fibonacci spirals is the way they feature in botanical phyllotaxis, the shape of kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) horns and the curvature of elephant tusks. Less well known is the way in which the crystallographic structure of DNA, stress patterns in nanomaterials, the stability of atomic nuclides and the periodicity of atomic matter depend on the Golden Ratio.1
    file:///home/philip/Downloads/4033-Main%20document-17047-1-10-20180108.pdf

    Do We Live in a “Golden Ratio” Universe? – December 2, 2014
    *The curl of an elephant tusk
    *The shape of a kudu’s horn
    *Hurricane spirals
    *The distribution of planets in the solar system
    *A biological species constant, T
    *The spiral structure of the cochlea ear-bone in a fossil hominin
    *The logarithmic spirals of galaxies
    *The structure of DNA
    *The growth of many plants (phyllotaxis)
    *The Periodic Table of the Elements
    *Spiral shells of certain mollusks, like snails
    *Spiral shells of living and extinct ammonites
    *Stress patterns in nanomaterials
    *The stability of atomic nuclides
    *The topology of space-time
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....91611.html

    DNA spiral as a Golden Section
    Excerpt: The DNA molecule, the program for all life, is based on the golden section. It measures 34 angstroms long by 21 angstroms wide for each full cycle of its double helix spiral. 34 and 21, of course, are numbers in the Fibonacci series and their ratio, 1.6190476 closely approximates phi, 1.6180339.
    DNA in the cell appears as a double-stranded helix referred to as B-DNA.This form of DNA has a two groove in its spirals, with a ratio of phi in the proportion of the major groove to the minor groove, or roughly 21 angstroms to 13 angstroms.
    ,,, a cross-sectional view from the top of the DNA double helix forms a decagon:
    A decagon is in essence two pentagons, with one rotated by 36 degrees from the other, so each spiral of the double helix must trace out the shape of a pentagon.
    The ratio of the diagonal of a pentagon to its side is Phi to 1. So, no matter which way you look at it, even in its smallest element, DNA, and life, is constructed using phi and the golden section!
    http://www.goldennumber.net/dna/

    Other places where materialism flounders, with the discovery of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR), the universe is now found to be a circular sphere. And whereas materialism, (inflationary models especially included), has no clue why this should be so, Theism predicted the universe to be a circular sphere thousands of years before it was discovered by modern science,

    Proverbs 8:26-27
    While as yet He had not made the earth or the fields, or the primeval dust of the world. When He prepared the heavens, I was there, when He drew a circle on the face of the deep,

    Job 26:10
    He has inscribed a circle on the face of the waters at the boundary between light and darkness.

    Likewise, the universe is also found to exceptionally ‘flat’,

    “The Universe today is actually very close to the most unlikely state of all, absolute flatness. And that means it must have been born in an even flatter state, as Dicke and Peebles, two of the Princeton astronomers involved in the discovery of the 3 K background radiation, pointed out in 1979. Finding the Universe in a state of even approximate flatness today is even less likely than finding a perfectly sharpened pencil balancing on its point for millions of years, for, as Dicke and Peebles pointed out, any deviation of the Universe from flatness in the Big Bang would have grown, and grown markedly, as the Universe expanded and aged. Like the pencil balanced on its point and given the tiniest nudges, the Universe soon shifts away from perfect flatness.”
    ~ John Gribbin, In Search of the Big Bang

    As best as we can measure, the geometry of our universe appears to be perfectly, totally, ever-so-boringly flat. On large, cosmic scales, parallel lines stay parallel forever, interior angles of triangles add up to 180 degrees, and so on. All the rules of Euclidean geometry that you learned in high school apply.
    But there’s no reason for our universe to be flat. At large scales it could’ve had any old curvature it wanted. Our cosmos could’ve been shaped like a giant, multidimensional beach ball, or a horse-riding saddle. But, no, it picked flat.
    – Paul Sutter

    and whereas materialism has no clue why the universe should be exceptionally flat, Theism predicted the universe to be exceptionally flat thousands of years before it was discovered by modern science,

    Job 38:4-5
    “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
    Tell me, if you understand.
    Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
    Who stretched a measuring line across it?

    As to molecular biology in particular, and directly contrary to the materialistic presuppositions of Darwinists, Biological ‘form’ simply is not reducible to mutations to DNA, nor is biological ‘form’ reducible to any other material particulars in biology that Darwinists may wish to invoke.

    Darwinism vs Biological Form – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyNzNPgjM4w

    In fact,, a strong case, via quantum information theory, can now be made for the Theistic claim that God ‘formed’ each of us in our mother’s womb:

    Darwinian Materialism vs. Quantum Biology – Part II – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSig2CsjKbg

    As well, as was also mentioned at the end of the preceding video, advances in quantum biology also give us strong evidence for an eternal soul that is capable of living beyond the death of our material bodies.

    The implication of finding ‘non-local’, beyond space and time, and ‘conserved’, quantum information in molecular biology on such a massive scale, in every important biomolecule in our bodies, is fairly, and pleasantly, obvious.
    That pleasant implication, of course, being the fact that we now have very strong empirical evidence suggesting that we do indeed have an eternal soul that is capable of living beyond the death of our material bodies. As Stuart Hameroff states in the following article, the quantum information,,, isn’t destroyed. It can’t be destroyed.,,, it’s possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body. Perhaps indefinitely as a soul.”

    Leading Scientists Say Consciousness Cannot Die It Goes Back To The Universe – Oct. 19, 2017 – Spiritual
    Excerpt: “Let’s say the heart stops beating. The blood stops flowing. The microtubules lose their quantum state. But the quantum information, which is in the microtubules, isn’t destroyed. It can’t be destroyed. It just distributes and dissipates to the universe at large. If a patient is resuscitated, revived, this quantum information can go back into the microtubules and the patient says, “I had a near death experience. I saw a white light. I saw a tunnel. I saw my dead relatives.,,” Now if they’re not revived and the patient dies, then it’s possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body. Perhaps indefinitely as a soul.”
    – Stuart Hameroff – Quantum Entangled Consciousness – Life After Death – video (5:00 minute mark)
    https://www.disclose.tv/leading-scientists-say-consciousness-cannot-die-it-goes-back-to-the-universe-315604

    Verse:

    Mark 8:37
    Is anything worth more than your soul?

  20. 20
    Ed George says:

    BA77

    Theism predicted the universe to be a circular sphere thousands of years before it was discovered by modern science,

    As the old saying goes “Even a broken click is right twice a day.” You conveniently ignore the thousands of things the bible and broader theism got wrong. Noah’s flood, plate tectonics, age of the earth, the concept of days preceding the ability to distinguish day from night, homosexuality is an abomination, women are inferior to men, etc.

  21. 21
    ET says:

    So Acartia Eddie thinks its ignorance is an argument? Really?

    For example, the Bible doesn’t say how old the earth is.

  22. 22
    bornagain77 says:

    Ed George claims the bible is wrong in fundamental ways.

    His list:

    “Noah’s flood, plate tectonics, age of the earth, the concept of days preceding the ability to distinguish day from night, homosexuality is an abomination, women are inferior to men,”

    And yet, scientific evidence for catastrophic megafloods, across the globe, approx. 13 to 14 thousand years before the present has now become compelling:

    Humanpast.net
    Excerpt: Worldwide, we know that the period of 14,000 to 13,000 years ago, which coincides with the peak of abundant monsoonal rains over India, was marked by violent oceanic flooding – in fact, the first of the three great episodes of global superfloods that dominated the meltdown of the Ice Age. The flooding was fed not merely by rain but by the cataclysmic synchronous collapse of large ice-masses on several different continents and by gigantic inundations of meltwater pouring down river systems into the oceans. (124)
    What happened, at around 13,000 years ago, was that the long period of uninterrupted warming that the world had just passed through (and that had greatly intensified, according to some studies, between 15,000 years ago and 13,000 years ago) was instantly brought to a halt – all at once, everywhere – by a global cold event known to palaeo climatologists as the ‘Younger Dryas’ or ‘Dryas III’. In many ways mysterious and unexplained, this was an almost unbelievably fast climatic reversion – from conditions that are calculated to have been warmer and wetter than today’s 13,000 years ago, to conditions that were colder and drier than those at the Last Glacial Maximum, not much more than a thousand years later. From that moment, around 12,800 years ago, it was as though an enchantment of ice had gripped the earth. In many areas that had been approaching terminal meltdown full glacial conditions were restored with breathtaking rapidity and all the gains that had been made since the LGM were simply stripped away…(124)
    A great, sudden extinction took place on the planet, perhaps as recently as 11,500 years ago (usually attributed to the end of that last ice age), in which hundreds of mammal and plant species disappeared from the face of the earth, driven into deep caverns and charred muck piles the world over. Modern science, with all its powers and prejudices, has been unable to adequately explain this event. (83)
    http://humanpast.net/environme.....ent11k.htm

    Study: Deep beneath the earth, more water than in all the oceans combined – June 16, 2014
    Excerpt: And it’s a good thing, too, Jacobsen told New Scientist: “We should be grateful for this deep reservoir. If it wasn’t there, it would be on the surface of the Earth, and mountain tops would be the only land poking out.”
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/06/16/study-deep-beneath-north-america-theres-more-water-than-in-all-the-oceans-combined/

    Next, plate tectonics does not contradict the Bible:

    Plate Tectonics and the Bible
    Science from the Bible. Theologians suggested early plate tectonic ideas related to the Bible. In 1668, French cleric François Placet suggested that “before the deluge America was not separated from the other parts of the earth.” In the 1700s, German theologian Theodor Christoph Lilienthal suggested a separation of land by water based on an exegesis of 1 Chron. 1:19 (or Gen. 11:25); however, if one associates plate tectonics with Noah’s flood, the separation would have happened sooner than indicated in these verses. In 1858, French geographer Antonio Snider-Pellegrini noted the parallelism of opposing shores of the Atlantic Ocean and inferred that an originally continuous landmass had been split to form the Atlantic at the time of Noah’s Flood.1
    https://www.grisda.org/how-do-plate-tectonics-relate-to-the-bible

    Next, “the concept of days preceding the ability to distinguish day from night”

    You do realize that, besides God creating time in the first place, that God’s concept of a day, according to the bible, is much different from ours?

    2 Peter 3:8
    But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

    Next, homosexuality is an abomination

    You disagree with God and believe he homosexual lifestyle is not sinful. Yet morality in your worldview is subjective. You have no basis other than your own personal opinion to disagree with God. If we are going on personal opinion, then I find homosexuality, i.e. men fondling and kissing each other in public, to be repugnant for me to see, i.e. YUCK!. You have no objective moral basis to say my gut reaction, i.e. YUCK!, to seeing homosexual acts in public is morally wrong. Whereas I do have an objective moral basis for believing that my gut reaction to seeing homosexual acts is correct.

    Next, women are inferior to men

    Contrary to what you believe, Christianity, and Christianity alone, has been the primary force in this world for elevating women to a place of honor and respect.

    How Christ and Christianity Elevated Women – March 14, 2016
    Conclusion
    On this site, we emphasize that God created two sexes, and He doesn’t want the demarcation to become blurry or indistinct. There are different roles for men and women, in the home and in the church. But that does not mean that Christianity seeks to suppress and degrade women. To the contrary, no one has ever lifted up women like Christ did. Christianity has elevated women and created cultures that value and protect them. Although the Scriptures prescribe a patriarchal order in the home and the church, this obviously has not been inconsistent with uplifting women and valuing their contributions.
    http://www.fulcrum7.com/blog/2.....218cdelgkx

    Whereas Atheists, especially with Obama’s gender identity insanity, apparently can’t even tell the difference between men and women anymore and many even claim that a woman can be a man or that a man can be a woman simply by imagining it to be so.

    Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;’ Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’
    By Michael W. Chapman | June 2, 2015
    https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgender-mental-disorder-sex-change

    The Transgender Movement and ‘Gender Identity’ in the Law
    By Peter Sprigg Senior Fellow for Policy Studies
    Virtually all people have a biological sex, identifiable at birth and immutable through life, which makes them either male or female. The transgender movement represents a denial of this physical reality.
    A Mental Disorder
    The belief that one is, or the desire to be, of a different “gender identity” from one’s biological sex has long been recognized as a mental disorder.[i] Psychiatrist Sander Breiner declares, “[W]hen an adult who is normal in appearance and functioning believes there is something ugly or defective in their appearance . . . there is a psychological problem.”[ii] Another psychiatrist, Rick Fitzgibbons, calls it “a fixed false belief . . . specifically a delusion.”[iii] Psychiatrist Paul McHugh declares, “It is a disorder of the mind. Not a disorder of the body.”[iv]
    Those who choose not to live with the “gender identity” that corresponds to their biological sex are known as “transgender” persons. (Note: The tiny number of persons who are “intersexed”—born with a mix of male and female genetic or biological characteristics—are in a separate category and are not considered “transgender.”[v])
    After extensive lobbying by transgender activists, the American Psychiatric Association changed the diagnosis of “Gender Identity Disorder” to “Gender Dysphoria” in 2013. It remains on the list of disorders, though, because, “To get insurance coverage for the medical treatments, individuals need a diagnosis.”[vi]
    Causes and Treatment of “Gender Dysphoria”
    While causality is difficult to determine, those who identify as transgender are more likely to have been victims of child sexual abuse or to have a history of trauma, loss, and family disruption.[vii]
    Susan Bradley, M.D. and Kenneth J. Zucker of the University of Toronto, leading experts in gender dysphoria in children, have declared that “clinicians should be optimistic, not nihilistic, about the possibility of helping the children to become more secure in their gender identity.”[viii] Psychiatrists have reported that gender dysphoria often occurs with other mental health problems in adults, and that it “improved in parallel during treatment” for those conditions.[ix]
    “Gender Reassignment” Surgery
    Full transition involves hormone treatments, breast surgery (removal or implants), other cosmetic surgery, genital reconstruction, and a change of personal identification. However, not every person seeking to live as the other sex will undergo surgery.[x]
    These surgical procedures are not always successful and can be extremely painful.[xi] A lifetime of hormone treatments can also have profound physical and psychological consequences.[xii] Psychiatrist Jon Meyer concluded that “surgery is not a proper treatment for a psychiatric disorder and it is clear to me that these patients have severe psychological problems that do not go away following surgery.”[xiii] High rates of suicide exist even among those who have already received gender reassignment surgery, which suggests that suicidal tendencies result from an underlying pathology.[xiv]
    https://www.frc.org/transgenderidentity
    Click here to read the entire paper
    https://downloads.frc.org/EF/EF16B28.pdf

    Now that I’ve answered your objections Ed, perhaps you now can answer some the devastating scientific critiques against your atheistic materialism?

    1. Naturalism/Materialism predicted space-time energy-matter always existed. Theism predicted space-time energy-matter were created. Big Bang cosmology now strongly indicates that time-space energy-matter had a sudden creation event approximately 14 billion years ago.

    2. Naturalism/Materialism predicted that the universe is a self sustaining system that is not dependent on anything else for its continued existence. Theism predicted that God upholds this universe in its continued existence. Breakthroughs in quantum mechanics reveal that this universe is dependent on a ‘non-local’, beyond space and time, cause for its continued existence.

    3. Naturalism/Materialism predicted that consciousness is an ‘emergent property’ of material reality and thus should have no particularly special position within material reality. Theism predicts consciousness precedes material reality and therefore, on that presupposition, consciousness should have a ‘special’ position within material reality. Quantum Mechanics reveals that consciousness has a special, even a central, position within material reality. –

    4. Naturalism/Materialism predicted the rate at which time passed was constant everywhere in the universe. Theism predicted God is eternal and is outside of time. – Special Relativity has shown that time, as we understand it, is relative and comes to a complete stop at the speed of light. (Psalm 90:4 – 2 Timothy 1:9) –

    5. Naturalism/Materialism predicted the universe did not have life in mind and that life was ultimately an accident of time and chance. Theism predicted this universe was purposely created by God with man in mind. Scientists find the universe is exquisitely fine-tuned for carbon-based life to exist in this universe. Moreover it is found, when scrutinizing the details of physics and chemistry, that not only is the universe fine-tuned for carbon based life, but is specifically fine-tuned for life like human life (R. Collins, M. Denton).-

    6. Naturalism/Materialism predicted complex life in this universe should be fairly common. Theism predicted the earth is extremely unique in this universe. Statistical analysis of the hundreds of required parameters which enable complex organic life to be possible on earth gives strong indication the earth is extremely unique in this universe (G. Gonzalez; Hugh Ross). –

    7. Naturalism/Materialism predicted it took a very long time for life to develop on earth. Theism predicted life to appear abruptly on earth after water appeared on earth (Genesis 1:10-11). Geochemical evidence from the oldest sedimentary rocks ever found on earth indicates that complex photosynthetic life has existed on earth as long as water has been on the face of earth. –

    8. Naturalism/Materialism predicted the first life to be relatively simple. Theism predicted that God is the source for all life on earth. The simplest life ever found on Earth is far more complex than any machine man has made through concerted effort. (Michael Denton PhD) –

    9. Naturalism/Materialism predicted the gradual unfolding of life would (someday) be self-evident in the fossil record. Theism predicted complex and diverse animal life to appear abruptly in the seas in God’s fifth day of creation. The Cambrian Explosion shows a sudden appearance of many different and completely unique fossils within a very short “geologic resolution time” in the Cambrian seas. –

    10. Naturalism/Materialism predicted there should be numerous transitional fossils found in the fossil record, Theism predicted sudden appearance and rapid diversity within different kinds found in the fossil record. Fossils are consistently characterized by sudden appearance of a group/kind in the fossil record(disparity), then rapid diversity within that group/kind, and then long term stability and even deterioration of variety within the overall group/kind, and within the specific species of the kind, over long periods of time. Of the few dozen or so fossils claimed as transitional, not one is uncontested as a true example of transition between major animal forms out of millions of collected fossils. –

    11. Naturalism/Materialism predicted animal speciation should happen on a somewhat constant basis on earth. Theism predicted man was the last species created on earth – Man (our genus ‘modern homo’ as distinct from the highly controversial ‘early homo’) is the last generally accepted major fossil form to have suddenly appeared in the fossil record. (Tattersall; Luskin)–

    12. Naturalism/Materialism predicted that the separation of human intelligence from animal intelligence ‘is one of degree and not of kind’ (C. Darwin). Theism predicted that we are made in the ‘image of God’- Despite an ‘explosion of research’ in this area over the last four decades, human beings alone are found to ‘mentally dissect the world into a multitude of discrete symbols, and combine and recombine those symbols in their minds to produce hypotheses of alternative possibilities.’ (Tattersall; Schwartz). Moreover, both biological life and the universe itself are found to be ‘information theoretic’ in their foundational basis.

    13. Naturalism/Materialism predicted much of the DNA code was junk. Theism predicted we are fearfully and wonderfully made – ENCODE research into the DNA has revealed a “biological jungle deeper, denser, and more difficult to penetrate than anyone imagined.”. –

    14. Naturalism/Materialism predicted a extremely beneficial and flexible mutation rate for DNA which was ultimately responsible for all the diversity and complexity of life we see on earth. Theism predicted only God created life on earth – The mutation rate to DNA is overwhelmingly detrimental. Detrimental to such a point that it is seriously questioned whether there are any truly beneficial, information building, mutations whatsoever. (M. Behe; JC Sanford) –

    15. Naturalism/Materialism predicted morality is subjective and illusory. Theism predicted morality is objective and real. Morality is found to be deeply embedded in the genetic responses of humans. As well, morality is found to be deeply embedded in the structure of the universe. Embedded to the point of eliciting physiological responses in humans before humans become aware of the morally troubling situation and even prior to the event even happening.

    16. Naturalism/Materialism predicted that we are merely our material bodies with no transcendent component to our being, and that we die when our material bodies die. Theism predicted that we have minds/souls that are transcendent of our bodies that live past the death of our material bodies. Transcendent, and ‘conserved’, (cannot be created or destroyed), ‘non-local’, (beyond space-time matter-energy), quantum entanglement/information, which is not reducible to matter-energy space-time, is now found in our material bodies on a massive scale (in every DNA and protein molecule).

    I won’t be holding my breath for Ed to honestly address these issues.

    Music:

    Kelly Clarkson – Silent Night ft. Trisha Yearwood, Reba McEntire
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BRVkgaIcaE

  23. 23
    Seversky says:

    Nature is pervaded by immaterial forms like chirality that determine the properties of matter. This interaction is well recognized in science. It is in this sense that spirit and matter can and do interact.

    What evidence is there of form other than as instantiated in matter? When the material brain dies or is destroyed, the so-called immaterial mind disappears and is unrecoverable as far as we can tell. If Egnor or anyone else can show us an immaterial mind existing entirely divorced from any physical substrate then please do so. But Egnor can’t and he knows it.

    There is undoubtedly a profound mystery about the origin of the laws or forms or information which defines this universe. The conditions inside the primordial singularity would seem to be so extreme that nothing could survive as itself, not laws, not form, not information. But if they did not come from within, where did they come from? If you want to believe in some unimaginable being living in some unimaginable realm beyond, I cannot prove you wrong but how is that any less speculative than the multiverse which you reject on those grounds?

  24. 24
    ET says:

    seversky:

    If you want to believe in some unimaginable being living in some unimaginable realm beyond, I cannot prove you wrong but how is that any less speculative than the multiverse which you reject on those grounds?

    You have NOTHING to support your position. You are not even wrong. If you had something you would present it. So it is very telling that all you have is blah blah blah

  25. 25
    Seversky says:

    Bornagain77 @ 22

    It might help to clarify some terms.

    “Naturalism”, according to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,

    …has no very precise meaning in contemporary philosophy. Its current usage derives from debates in America in the first half of the last century. The self-proclaimed “naturalists” from that period included John Dewey, Ernest Nagel, Sidney Hook and Roy Wood Sellars. These philosophers aimed to ally philosophy more closely with science. They urged that reality is exhausted by nature, containing nothing “supernatural”, and that the scientific method should be used to investigate all areas of reality, including the “human spirit” (Krikorian 1944; Kim 2003).

    “Physicalism” or “materialism”, according to Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,

    is the thesis that everything is physical, or as contemporary philosophers sometimes put it, that everything supervenes on the physical. The thesis is usually intended as a metaphysical thesis, parallel to the thesis attributed to the ancient Greek philosopher Thales, that everything is water, or the idealism of the 18th Century philosopher Berkeley, that everything is mental. The general idea is that the nature of the actual world (i.e. the universe and everything in it) conforms to a certain condition, the condition of being physical. Of course, physicalists don’t deny that the world might contain many items that at first glance don’t seem physical — items of a biological, or psychological, or moral, or social nature. But they insist nevertheless that at the end of the day such items are either physical or supervene on the physical.

    According to this entry on Quora:

    Deism is the belief in a creator, who made the world but does not take a personal interest in it — doesn’t require worship, answer prayers, judge behavior, or necessarily promise a life after death (unless that was part of the original creation). Deism is a fairly benign belief, because there are no consequences for accepting or rejecting it.

    Theism is the belief in an active, interventionist god who not only created the world (and some believe fine-tuned it for human use), but also may require worship, answer prayers, judge sinners, and may have created a divine son or other entities to live among humans. Most theists are 100 percent certain their god(s) exist, and have faith in this without any objective, verifiable evidence. There are many theistic religions, each of which insists it is the only true one.

    Moving on to BA77’s list:

    1. Naturalism/Materialism predicted time-space energy-matter always existed. Theism predicted time-space energy-matter were created. Big Bang cosmology now strongly indicates that time-space energy-matter had a sudden creation event approximately 14 billion years ago.

    Both contenders for the crown in cosmology – Big Bang and Steady State – were naturalistic/materialistic (nat/mat) theories. Both theism and deism assume a creator god, one hands-on, the other hands-off.

    The current age of the universe is estimated to be around 13.82 bn years, somewhat older than the 6000 years predicted by one interpretation of one theistic faith.

    2. Naturalism/Materialism predicted that the universe is a self sustaining system that is not dependent on anything else for its continued existence. Theism predicted that God upholds this universe in its continued existence. Breakthroughs in quantum mechanics reveal that this universe is dependent on a ‘non-local’, beyond space and time, cause for its continued existence.

    Theism covers a number of faiths and denominations. Not all of them hold that God is sustaining the entire universe from second-to-second.

    Non-locality in quantum mechanics (a nat/mat theory) does not necessarily imply that the universe is dependent on something outside itself for continued existence. It may be that we just be evidence of an additional dimension to physical reality, something we do not observe in our everyday experience of the natural order. It also implies that our everyday perceptions are incomplete at least and are illusory to that extent.

    3. Naturalism/Materialism predicted that consciousness is an ‘emergent property’ of material reality and thus should have no particularly special position within material reality. Theism predicts consciousness precedes material reality and therefore, on that presupposition, consciousness should have a ‘special’ position within material reality. Quantum Mechanics reveals that consciousness has a special, even a central, position within material reality.

    Consciousness is not observed to exist apart from a physical substrate. A living brain exhibits consciousness, a dead brain does not. The signs of consciousness that were once exhibited by a dead brain have so far proven to be unrecoverable in all cases.

    Researchers are still arguing over how to understand the “observer effect” in quantum physics. It certainly doesn’t support the simplistic notion that consciousness is what holds reality together and it doesn’t answer the obvious question which is that, if nothing exists until it is being observed or measured, what is being observed or measured in the first place?

    4. Naturalism/Materialism predicted the rate at which time passed was constant everywhere in the universe. Theism predicted God is eternal and is outside of time. – Special Relativity has shown that time, as we understand it, is relative and comes to a complete stop at the speed of light. (Psalm 90:4 – 2 Timothy 1:9)

    Both Newtonian mechanics and relativity are nat/mat theories.

    None of the theistic faiths that I’m aware of make specific predictions about the rate at which time passes.

    Psalm 90:4 – “For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.” refers to God’s perception of time.

    2 Timothy 1:9 – “Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,” concerns salvation not time.

    And neither make any prediction concerning the speed of light.

    5. Naturalism/Materialism predicted the universe did not have life in mind and that life was ultimately an accident of time and chance. Theism predicted this universe was purposely created by God with man in mind. Scientists find the universe is exquisitely fine-tuned for carbon-based life to exist in this universe. Moreover it is found, when scrutinizing the details of physics and chemistry, that not only is the universe fine-tuned for carbon based life, but is specifically fine-tuned for life like human life (R. Collins, M. Denton).

    Observations and calculations have shown that, if certain fundamental physical (nat/mat) constants varied from their observed values by even a small amount, the universe in which we live could not exist. On the other hand, the vast majority of this universe is unremittingly hostile to organic life such as ourselves. It is a huge and unwarranted leap of faith from those observations to the conclusion that this entire universe was created just for us.

    6. Naturalism/Materialism predicted complex life in this universe should be fairly common. Theism predicted the earth is extremely unique in this universe. Statistical analysis of the hundreds of required parameters which enable complex organic life to be possible on earth gives strong indication the earth is extremely unique in this universe (Gonzalez).

    Nat/mat estimates concerning the prevalence of life in the universe vary considerably. Our planet could be unique, not just “extremely unique” (is that like being ‘a bit pregnant’) in the sense that there is no other exactly like it that we know of. On the other hand, astronomers are finding plentiful evidence of planets around nearby stars so it’s certainly possible that there are other planets similar to Earth which bear life. Any theistic prediction that the Earth is unique as a home for life is in serious danger of being proved wrong.

    7. Naturalism/Materialism predicted it took a very long time for life to develop on earth. Theism predicted life to appear abruptly on earth after water appeared on earth (Genesis 1:10-11). Geochemical evidence from the oldest sedimentary rocks ever found on earth indicates that complex photosynthetic life has existed on earth as long as water has been on the face of earth.

    Nat/mat observations find evidence of life stretching far into deep time, tailing off billions of years ago and completely at odds with a special creation event 6000 years back.

    One creation story – that of Christianity – refers to life appearing after water. Unfortunately, it also refers to day and night existing before light was created.

    8. Naturalism/Materialism predicted the first life to be relatively simple. Theism predicted that God is the source for all life on earth. The simplest life ever found on Earth is far more complex than any machine man has made through concerted effort. (Michael Denton PhD)

    The simplest life found on earth so far is not necessarily the earliest life ever to appear on Earth. Its relative complexity does not contradict the hypothesis that much simpler forms existed earlier or support a claim that they were created by a god.

    9. Naturalism/Materialism predicted the gradual unfolding of life would (someday) be self-evident in the fossil record. Theism predicted complex and diverse animal life to appear abruptly in the seas in God’s fifth day of creation. The Cambrian Explosion shows a sudden appearance of many different and completely unique fossils within a very short “geologic resolution time” in the Cambrian seas.

    The nat/mat theory of evolution predicted that the “unfolding” of life would proceed in small, incremental steps but allowed that the rate at which it could happen could vary considerably. The 20-25 mn year Cambrian Explosion was a period when it happened a lot more rapidly but there is evidence of life preceding it. It was not the original creation event described in Genesis.

    10. Naturalism/Materialism predicted there should be numerous transitional fossils found in the fossil record, Theism predicted sudden appearance and rapid diversity within different kinds found in the fossil record. […]

    Nat/mat theory holds that fossilization is a very rare event but even so transitional fossils have already been found. Theism makes no predictions about the existence let alone the frequency of fossils, transitional or otherwise, in the geological record.

    11. Naturalism/Materialism predicted animal speciation should happen on a somewhat constant basis on earth. Theism predicted man was the last species created on earth – Man (our genus ‘modern homo’ as distinct from the highly controversial ‘early homo’) is the last generally accepted major fossil form to have suddenly appeared in the fossil record. (Tattersall; Luskin)–

    It is estimated that new species are being discovered by science at the rate of 15000 – 20000 per year. The rate of speciation can vary hugely, new species of large animals taking hundreds of thousands of years to appear while new bacteria or viruses can emerge in just a few years. One study cataloged some 1400 human pathogens of which 87 were characterized as “novel”. If evolution occurs, there is no reason to think it has stopped now.

    12. Naturalism/Materialism predicted that the separation of human intelligence from animal intelligence ‘is one of degree and not of kind’(C. Darwin). Theism predicted that we are made in the ‘image of God’- Despite an ‘explosion of research’ in this area over the last four decades, human beings alone are found to ‘mentally dissect the world into a multitude of discrete symbols, and combine and recombine those symbols in their minds to produce hypotheses of alternative possibilities.’ (Tattersall; Schwartz). Moreover, both biological life and the universe itself are found to be ‘information theoretic’ in their foundational basis.

    Nothing in that research contradicts Darwin’s original claim that it was a question of degree not of kind.

    13. Naturalism/Materialism predicted much of the DNA code was junk. Theism predicted we are fearfully and wonderfully made – ENCODE research into the DNA has revealed a “biological jungle deeper, denser, and more difficult to penetrate than anyone imagined.”.

    Nat/mat still predicts that much of our DNA is ‘junk’. The ENCODE researchers were heavily criticized for overstating their case.

    Theism said nothing about the existence of DNA, let alone how much of it night be ‘junk’

    14. Naturalism/Materialism predicted a extremely beneficial and flexible mutation rate for DNA which was ultimately responsible for all the diversity and complexity of life we see on earth. Theism predicted only God created life on earth – The mutation rate to DNA is overwhelmingly detrimental. Detrimental to such a point that it is seriously questioned whether there are any truly beneficial, information building, mutations whatsoever. (M. Behe; JC Sanford)

    Nat/mat theory always held that more mutations were detrimental than beneficial if for no other reason than that there are many more ways for something to go wrong than to go right. With the advent of neutral theory, the majority of mutations are held to be neutral or nearly so, a much smaller number are detrimental and a much smaller number still are positively beneficial, all of that being dependent on circumstances.

    As noted before, theism made no predictions concerning the existence of DNA, let alone the relative frequencies of neutral, detrimental or beneficial mutations.

    15. Naturalism/Materialism predicted morality is subjective and illusory. Theism predicted morality is objective and real. Morality is found to be deeply embedded in the genetic responses of humans. As well, morality is found to be deeply embedded in the structure of the universe.

    Nat/mat argues that morality is subjective. Theistic faiths simply argue that the morality dispensed by their chosen deity overrides all others. That doesn’t make it objective. The claim that morality is somehow embedded in our genes or in the fabric of the universe is an entirely unsubstantiated claim.

    16. Naturalism/Materialism predicted that we are merely our material bodies with no transcendent component to our being, and that we die when our material bodies die. Theism predicted that we have minds/souls that are transcendent of our bodies that live past the death of our material bodies. Transcendent, and ‘conserved’, (cannot be created or destroyed), ‘non-local’, (beyond space-time matter-energy), quantum entanglement/information, which is not reducible to matter-energy space-time, is now found in our material bodies on a massive scale (in every DNA and protein molecule).

    As noted above, quantum theory is a nat/mat theory. It just deals with nat/mat reality on the very smallest scales. It lends no support to the concept of a transcendent soul which at best is poorly-defined and at worst is incoherent.

    Furthermore, in his The Life of Samuel Johnson James Boswell recounts the following episode:

    After we came out of the church, we stood talking for some time together of Bishop Berkeley’s ingenious sophistry to prove the nonexistence of matter, and that every thing in the universe is merely ideal. I observed, that though we are satisfied his doctrine is not true, it is impossible to refute it. I never shall forget the alacrity with which Johnson answered, striking his foot with mighty force against a large stone, till he rebounded from it — “I refute it thus.”

    The reality is that, if you kick a stone hard now, it will hurt your foot just as much as it did in Johnson’s day. Quantum theory has not changed that one jot. What has changed profoundly is our understanding of the nature of matter right down to the quantum scale. And quantum theory and the phenomena it describes do not appear in any theology. It is entirely a product of naturalistic science. If we had relied on religion to guide us in these matters we would still be entirely ignorant about the quantum domain.

  26. 26
    bornagain77 says:

    Seversky must be on drugs:

    For example, Seversky claims that the Big Bang theory was a naturalistic/materialistic theory.

    Funny, the “father” of the Big Bang was the Belgian Priest, George Lemaitre

    Einstein and The Belgian Priest, George Lemaitre – The “Father” Of The Big Bang Theory – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0JY2soRTeo

    Moreover, contrary to what you believe, Fred Hoyle’s Steady State Theory was developed directly in backlash to the growing evidence for a Big Bang, (in fact Hoyle first used the term ‘Big Bang’ as a derogatory term to express his disdain for a creation event. Hardly a philosophically neutral position) (of note Hoyle later became a Deist or maybe even a Theist).
    Moreover, Einstein’s greatest blunder is where he, philosophically not scientifically, added a constant to his General Relativity equation to reflect his naturalistic belief that the universe has always existed.
    Eddington philosophically wished that he ‘should like to find a genuine loophole’ to the ‘repugnant notion’ of a creation of the universe.
    All these philosophical reactions to the evidence for the Big Bang were derived solely from the naturalistic/materialistic philosophy of believing the universe has always existed.
    Even the atheist Carl Sagan reflected this naturalistic belief that the universe has always existed, years after the Big Bang was already accepted science:

    ‘The Cosmos is all that is or was or ever will be.’
    Carl Sagan

    To this day atheists fight tooth and nail against a beginning for the universe. This is reflected in Dr. Craig’s repeated defense of the Kalam cosmological argument against atheists who simply refuse to accept that the universe has/had a transcendent origin!

    Moreover, contrary to what you believe, only the Bible was correct in its prediction for a absolute beginning to the universe.

    “among all the ‘holy’ books, of all the major religions in the world, only the Holy Bible was correct in its claim for a transcendent origin of the universe. Some later ‘holy’ books, such as the Mormon text “Pearl of Great Price” and the Qur’an, copy the concept of a transcendent origin from the Bible but also include teachings that are inconsistent with that now established fact.” (Hugh Ross; Why The Universe Is The Way It Is; Pg. 228; Chpt.9; note 5)

    The Uniqueness Of The Bible Among ‘holy books’ and Evidence of God in Creation (Hugh Ross) – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjYSz1OYG8Y

    The Most Important Verse in the Bible – Prager University – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BqWdu1BnBQ

    The Uniqueness of Genesis 1:1 – William Lane Craig – video
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBXdQCkISo0

    For you to try to co-opt the creation of the universe as a Naturalistic ‘prediction’ is nothing less than sheer intellectual dishonesty on your part to the highest degree!

    Seversky’s intellectual dishonesty is pervasive throughout his entire post, here is a defense against all of his dishonest and/or delusional claims:

    (January 2019 – defense of all 16 predictions (with references) against Seversky’s flimsy naturalistic counterclaims)
    https://uncommondescent.com/philosophy/michael-shermers-case-for-scientific-naturalism/#comment-670894

  27. 27
    ET says:

    seversky:

    Both contenders for the crown in cosmology – Big Bang and Steady State – were naturalistic/materialistic (nat/mat) theories.

    In what way? Neither even attempted to show how nature did it nor if nature could do it.

  28. 28
    Silver Asiatic says:

    Seversky

    What evidence is there of form other than as instantiated in matter? … If Egnor or anyone else can show us an immaterial mind existing entirely divorced from any physical substrate then please do so.

    You seem to be asking for a physical, sensory observation of non-physical entities. You request that someone can “show you” an immaterial object. But your eyes can only see material objects. Your fingers cannot touch an immaterial object. So, your request that we “show you” doesn’t follow. It’s not consistent with the claim.

    Immaterial objects are abstract entities. They exist. Something like triangularity is an immaterial concept. Or something like “redness” – an abstract, immaterial concept.
    These immaterial objects are not the products of the human mind. They are not dependent on human minds for their existence.
    The angles of an Euclidean triangle add up to the sum of two right angles. This is an objective and necessary truth, not a construct of human minds. That immaterial concept remains true even if no human minds existed any more, or even if the material world went out of existence. The same is true of numbers and mathematical truths. 2+2=4 is not dependent upon the material world (we do not need to count material objects to prove it). Or the infinite series of numbers. That is an immaterial object that actually transcends the material world, or of natural, biological power of human minds since it extends infinitely. A proposition like “Caesar was assassinated on the Ides of March” remains true even if the entire material world and all human minds went out of existence. It’s an immaterial object.

    There is undoubtedly a profound mystery about the origin of the laws or forms or information which defines this universe.

    Right, and we look for answers or explanations for this mystery. One answer is hylomorphic dualism that Dr. Engor explained. Immaterial entities exist and interact with matter. The materialist explanations for immaterial entities are that they don’t exist, or that they are merely words for actual individual objects. But the word “redness” does not refer to an object, but its a concept abstracted in general from all objects which are red. So, the materialist view is not correct.
    We could then say, merely, that there is a better answer – that immaterial objects do exist and they interact with matter.

    But if they did not come from within, where did they come from? If you want to believe in some unimaginable being living in some unimaginable realm beyond, I cannot prove you wrong but how is that any less speculative than the multiverse which you reject on those grounds?

    They come from a being in a realm beyond, yes. But it is less speculative because that being necessarily exists. That is the being that would sustain and provide the cause and properties for any sort of multiverse. A multiverse does not explain it’s own origin.
    A multiverse is a derivative of various causes. For a multiverse to exist, something that already possesses the power and existence (to give a multiverse being, and to hold it together) must exist.
    So, this first cause, first being is necessary and not speculative. That being, where immaterial forms, laws of logic and existence itself originates is what we can discover as a logical conclusion. It’s not a mere speculation the way a multiverse is.

Leave a Reply