My Thought About Justice is Not Justice: Easy for ID; a Deal Killer for Materialism

_{Barry Arrington

February 5, 2018

Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

At ENV Neurosurgeon Michael Egnor exposes how materialist metaphysics flounders on logical grounds in its theory of mind:

As an example, let us suppose that a certain pattern of neuronal activation in my cortex were shown to represent my thought about justice. Obviously that pattern is not my thought about justice itself — justice is a concept, not a bunch of neurons. And if that pattern of neuronal activation represented my thought about justice, it must map to my thought of justice, which presupposes my thought about justice and thus cannot explain it.

Succinctly, mental representation of abstract thought presupposes abstract thought, and cannot explain it. It is on abstract thought that materialism, as a theory of mind, flounders. Abstract thought, classically understood as intellect and will, are inherently immaterial. Any representation in the brain of abstract thought (while it may exist) necessarily presupposes abstract thought itself, which must, by its nature, be an immaterial power of the mind.

Comments

rvb8, the thing is, you're actually asserting a metaphysical position. But hey, you don't need to be sorry! :)BPS from AZ_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
01:19 PM
1
01
19
PM
PDT}

Yet another discussion on the 'spiritual animal', that is man, and his, 'immortal'(?) soul? Of course this necessarily, and messily spills into 'mind' versus material brain consciousness. Unfortunately for all the supporters of the, 'exceptional' human mind, J-Mac points out the show stopper to the,'mind' is separate to the 'material' brain supporters. What happened to my mind when I was drunk last night? Did it sit that evening out? Large parts of an occasional evening are lost, and my physical brain has lost them, has the mind? Simple brain trauma destroys an individual, their personality, their memories, their lives; how do I explain these facts if the mind is separate from the physical brain? Surely the 'mind' would retain the individual's personality, and memories; knowledge of who they are as an individual? I'm sorry, without a functioning physical brain there is no individual, or their mind.rvb8_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
12:55 PM
12
12
55
PM
PDT}

The stipulation of an immortal, conscious, non-material soul is not needed to appreciate a non-material aspect to the mind's operation. To assume it is creates an unnecessary weakness for design arguments. We are more than physical beings, but that does not require that we have some part of us existing separate from our body, and certainly not that it is immortal. The idea of an immortal soul is a majority belief among Christians and in some other faiths. A minority of Christians see our existence as a physical body infused with an animating spirit. It is both of those components, together, that makes us a person, and neither part lives or thinks on its own. In the Christian Bible, this belief begins in the book of Genesis with the statement that "God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul". (Gen 2:7) A physical body allied with the breath of life becomes a living soul. I don't intend to begin an argument about the Bible definition of a soul. I only offer this idea as another option for those who see problems with an immortal, non-material yet conscious soul's need for a physical body.DennisM_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
12:33 PM
12
12
33
PM
PDT}

@9, Not really. If one does believe in an immortal, non-material soul, then you also believe that there is more to life than a material existence. The assumption that there is more to existence than a purely material existence, of necessity requires that at least part of existence is, or at least involves, a material existence. In that case, if one believes that we are essentially immaterial, immaterial souls, then the brain and body is still required for one's MATERIAL existence and expression. It does not mean that the soul could not in any circumstance operate outside of it (eg when someone dies and their soul is free from being tied to the body...which is necessarily part of having an immortal soul, otherwise it wouldn't be immortal).outside_observer_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
12:02 PM
12
12
02
PM
PDT}

@8 "Why would the soul need a body at all, then?" Congratulations!!! I have proven my point!J-Mac_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
11:52 AM
11
11
52
AM
PDT}

J-Mac @1 "Why would the soul need a brain, if it creates thoughts, consciousness and operates on its own without it?" Why would the soul need a body at all, then? But I don't think that many would dispute that a reasonably functioning body (including, but not limited to the brain) is required for a human to properly express himself in the natural world. To illustrate, If your brain was fully functioning, but you were "locked in", then for the purposes of you actually doing anything you would essentially be as good as dead. If your body was fully functioning, but your brain was damaged to the point that you're thinking was impaired, then likewise you would be in the same condition. Or put another way, if your brain is damaged to the point where it would no longer be able to accurately process "your thoughts," it doesn't mean that there is no immaterial, immortal "you." If I had a radio but it was seriously damaged, it may no longer be able to pick up the signal, but that doesn't mean that the signal doesn't exist. When the radio is properly working, does the radio produce the signal? Certainly not! All it does is receive the signal and process it in such a way that it is recognizable and meaningful to the listener. It takes something that it unobserved (ie, wavelengths undetectable to normal human senses), and turns it into something that can be observed. But if the radio breaks, that does not mean that the signal is gone, it just means that the radio broke. Does the brain produce consciousness? No, but it is nonetheless required for consciousness to properly operate. If we presuppose an immortal soul and/or spirit, then it is self-evident that a reasonably functioning body (which would include the brain) is still be a vital necessity for individuals to express themselves in this natural world. But just because it is self-evident that a reasonably functioning body is necessary for consciousness to operate in this natural world, that does not make it self-evident that a reasonably functioning body is ALL that is required. p.s. It seems to me someone on this site may have made a similar argument. If that is the case, I am not trying to purloin, but regardless this is a simple version how I see it.outside_observer_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
11:51 AM
11
11
51
AM
PDT}

@Barry Arrington, The pursuit of science and religion should be the pursuit of truth and not preconceived ideas...J-Mac_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
11:51 AM
11
11
51
AM
PDT}

niwrad @3 "Because the soul has to control a body. To control it a material brain is necessary." Except when the soul doesn’t, just like in the instances I have mentioned...J-Mac_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
11:48 AM
11
11
48
AM
PDT}

BPS, agreed. I started to use the "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" trope. But it is overworked and some people seem to believe one can actually do that. I like yours better.Barry Arrington_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
11:40 AM
11
11
40
AM
PDT}

J-Mac
However, my problem with this is that if thoughts are generated by the immortal soul, why did we need a brain in the first place?
It is astonishing that you think the fact that you have a "problem" with the truth should matter to anyone other than yourself. Perhaps you find that an argument from personal incredulity is effective. Most people do not. Help me out here J. Unless you can tell us why your personal incredulity matters, why should we respond to it other than by saying it does not matter?Barry Arrington_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
11:35 AM
11
11
35
AM
PDT}

"Why would the soul need a brain, if it creates thoughts, consciousness and operates on its own without it?" Because the soul has to control a body. To control it a material brain is necessary. Similarly, you can conceive things in abstract, but if you want to construct or control them in matter you have to descend on the material level and use material means.niwrad_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
11:27 AM
11
11
27
AM
PDT}

The problem with Dr. Egnor's thinking is that if something in the brain is not material, or can't be expressed by materialistic means, therefore it has to be spiritual; i.e. immortal soul...It's not quantum mechanics, we all get it. However, my problem with this is that if thoughts are generated by the immortal soul, why did we need a brain in the first place? Why does the mind function fine until certain parts of the brain are damaged or disabled by anesthetic? If the soul is the mind, thought, consciousness creator, why does it fail when there is a small and yet essential brain injury? Why would the soul need a brain, if it creates thoughts, consciousness and operates on its own without it?J-Mac_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
10:07 AM
10
10
07
AM
PDT}

Thank you for the link to this article. Perhaps my favorite part is this: "A representation of a city — a map — presumes the city. A representation of my cat presumes my cat. And here’s the problem: a representation of my thought about justice presumes my thought about justice. So representation cannot provide any final explanation for abstract thought, because the representation of an abstract thought, even if it exists, presupposes the abstract thought itself." I'm occasionally fond of saying "A materialist trying to explain consciousness is like a man yanking on his hair real hard in an attempt to lift his feet off the ground." For some reason, this is a difficult notion for many folks to apprehend.BPS from AZ_{February 5, 2018
February
02
Feb
5
05
2018
07:55 AM
7
07
55
AM
PDT}

Prev 1 … 4 5 6

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply