Wise words from Rabbi Moshe Averick
| July 31, 2016 | Posted by News under Atheism, Intelligent Design, Naturalism |
From Nonsense of a High Order: The Confused World of Modern Atheism:
It is my opinion that the reality of the Creator, or the existence of God, is a truth that is quite accessible. Although the ideas that I will present may require careful analysis and contemplation, they are not particularly complicated or difficult. Most can be understood by an intelligent and inquisitive high school senior. This is not necessarily a reflection of an individual’s native intelligence; proper analysis of an abstract or philosophical concept is a skill he or she may never have acquired. Regarding this, I hope I have presented my ideas in a clear enough fashion that newcomers will be able to follow.
There is a second challenging factor that is much more serious ad cuts to the core of the essential nature of a human being. Quite simply, it is the desire for truth. If people have not assigned “truth” a top slot on their list of priorities, it does not matter what I said to them and what evidence is presented. … (pp. 24–25)
Moshe Averick … has taught theology, spirituality and religious philosophy for nearly 30 years. Many of his students have gone on to become educators and rabbinic leaders in North America, England, and Israel. He is known for his singular ability to explain complex topics in clear, understandable language and – to borrow the description of one University of Chicago-trained philosopher of science – his “wicked” sense of humor.
See also: Moshe Averick’s Nonsense!updated
Follow UD News at Twitter!
6 Responses to Wise words from Rabbi Moshe Averick
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
from the Amazon page:
I’m glad to see Rabbi M.Averick bring his fairly impressive talent for literature research, besides bringing it to the Origin of Life (OOL), to the ‘baffling scientific mystery’ of Human consciousness.
Human consciousness is a mystery to which Darwinists are even more baffled than they are with the profound enigma of the OOL.
A few Notes:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology neuroscientist Sebastian Seung stated:
There is simply no direct evidence that anything material is capable of generating consciousness. As Rutgers University philosopher Jerry Fodor says,
As Nobel neurophysiologist Roger Sperry wrote,
From modern physics, Nobel prize-winner Eugene Wigner agreed:
Contemporary physicist Nick Herbert states,
Physician and author Larry Dossey wrote:
Moreover, even if Darwinists could somehow explain the ‘illusion’ of consciousness, the perceptions of reality that that supposed ‘illusion of consciousness’ would be having would be illusory too!:
In the following video and article, Donald Hoffman has, through numerous computer simulations of population genetics, proved that if Darwinian evolution were actually true then all of our perceptions of reality would be illusory.
Thus, given materialistic/atheistic premises, people become illusions whose observations of reality are themselves illusory.
And why in blue blazes should anyone trust what illusions having illusions have to say about reality? Much less, how can a coherent scientific theory ever be based on illusions having illusions? (See Edgar Allen Poe – ‘A Dream within a Dream”)
Moreover, completely contrary to materialistic premises, conscious observation, far from being unreliable and illusory, is experimentally found to be far more integral to reality, i.e. far more reliable of reality, than the math of population genetics dictates. In the following experiment, it was found that reality doesn’t exist without an observer.
Apparently science itself could care less if atheists are forced to believe, because of the math of population genetics, that their observations of reality are illusory! 🙂
News, there are some great quotes available from that book. 🙂
Generally, these atheist writers display spectacular ignorance…
– p. 35
The New York Times explains it all for you, here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05......html?_r=0
Enjoy!
per NYT article at 3, and that article is one more reason, as if we needed any more reasons, to let the NY Times go the way of dinosaurs into extinction.
BA77 @4: I throw you a piece of red meat, and that’s all I get? 🙂
“I throw you a piece of red meat”
You threw me a piece of rotten garbage and called it red meat! Disagee? Then pick out exactly what he said that settled the ‘hard problem’ once and for all and send it to Nagel, Chalmers, Hoffman, Egnor, and all the others who find the hard problem to be irreconcilable for materialistic explanations.
His article boils down to, “nothing to see here folks move along”.
The profound problems he skips over in order to claim that ‘Consciousness Isn’t a Mystery. It’s (just) Matter’ are numerous.
If he is going to claim that rocks are subjectively conscious, which is what he is basically doing with ‘the hard problem’, I certainly want to see some fairly profound empirical evidence rather than the philosophical hand waving that he presented.
Supplemental note: Einstein did not win a Nobel prize for relativity because he basically ran straight up against ‘the hard problem’ of consciousness:
After Bergson, Einstein had an encounter with Carnap, another philosopher, and Einstein was asked
Einstein’s answer was categorical, he said:
Quote was taken from the last few minutes of this following video.
And here a bit more detail:
The meaning of the question of ‘the Now’ can be read in full context in the following article:
The statement to Carnap on the train that, ‘the now’ cannot be turned into an object of physical measurement’, was an interesting statement for Einstein to make to the philosopher since ‘the now of the mind’ has, from many recent experiments in quantum mechanics, now undermined the space-time of Einstein’s General Relativity as to being the absolute frame of reference for reality.