The reality of God, I would say, with a rigorous understanding of contingency, becomes self-evident. Probability doesn’t even enter into the discussion. Want to know why there can be no physical cause of the universe? Because anything physical is defined as that which exists. No physical thing can create from nothing, let alone hold itself in being. Check and mate, atheists. “But have you read A universe from nothing?” Have you ever worship Dawkins at your personal shrine? “...”
+rugossss Its all opinion - and most people with those opinions honestly believe that it was self created, whereas it clearly belongs to an adopted system of thought. Some people would rather be certain in their limited views than battle with the question of reality. They reside in the small patch of light that has been created for them, unaware of how deep the dark of ignorance goes.
A very balanced perspective not in much supply nowadays on both sides of the issue. It's getting better but there's still, 10 years later, much room for improvement.
If materialism is true (space, time, matter, and energy is all that exists) , please explain how an emergent thing like consciousness is housed within the simple atoms. And don't default to the silly, goal post shifting argument of "brute facts". Thomas Nagel has realized how incredibly difficult this question is and has come to the conclusion that assuming materialism just might be a reductio ad absurdum, incapable of explaining the complexities of the universe. OK atheists, the gauntlet is down. Crawl out from under your assumptions and give us an empirically powerful explanation of WHY the structure of reality possesses the features that is does.
Why is it that humanity is presumptuous enough to believe that we can explain these questions in the first place? Of course our inquisitiveness into the nature of the Universe and existence itself is bound intrinsically to our consciousness but building an empirical argument for a construct, which we view from an infinitesimally small viewpoint, seems beyond optimistic. I am personally agnostic and so believe that, Everything that exists seems rather too complex to be just an accident. However, to chose to 'worship' or 'believe in' scientific rational explanation or to 'worship' or 'believe in' religion requires an individual's conscious choice. As a Christian, and not erudite in the various world religions, it seems to me that if any 'God(s)' exist(s) s/he/it/they would be beyond the psychological need of our veneration. From our 'snapshot' of reality how could we possibly fathom concepts/realities/aspects which probably exist when we probably do not have the senses or intellect to perceive or comprehend them?
I'm a big fan of S.Morris work. He's a brilliant scientist and makes very good arguments for the 'invisible landscape' that allows natural selection to build creature design. I'm a bit surprised though, that he is a christian, and in particular, seems to believe in a literal resurrection (of Jesus). In the biblical story, whether there were so called 'eye witnesses' to the resurrection is irrelavant. Some people today actually believe that preachers are actually performing miracles on TV, like Benny H. Are their testimonies reliable? Of course not.
Yep I am also big fan of S.C.Morris and mostly his convergence theory and I am also stunned to get to know that he is religious. However... it seems to me (from what I've heard) that he simply doesn't want to offend some grandma which is still walking on our dear earth. The guy is 2 smart INDEED !
Modifying the brain modifies what we are conscious OF. There's an unfortunate confusion, in discussing this subject, between the phenomenon of experience and its content.
modifying the brain does NOT modify consciousness...look at it from a disease point of view..a person with severe alzheimer's (and my grandma has the disease) where by the brain is being destroyed by a disease still has full working consciousness..my grandma still has full lucid consciousness... some would say well her mind has been modified then...again this is wrong...it is not her mind that is modified ..it's just that the tool (the brain) is being destroyed by a disease so mind is unable to function properly within that destroyed tool..it's a bit like saying when you smash a TV set, you disrupt the picture on the screen but you do NOT affect the actual essence of what you are seeing..the channel still exists...the same applies to the brain.
It's a mistake to base a faith on "facts". People used to believe in Zeus because they noticed lightning. When the truth was discovered, they lost their faith.
Prof Morris' belief in Christ hinges around the resurrection, as does the belief of all of us that are Christian. Is it really so hard to believe that God exists? The main reason that the vast majority of people don't topically believe in God is because he is not present in their living rooms. This empirical approach to knowledge is adopted by just about everyone who is retreating from things they don't want to even try to acknowledge as a possibility. I have yet to see any defense of this philosophical idea (empiricism) from any person that trolls these sights in order to debunk Christianity. The real reason people reject even the possibility of God? They don't want to admit that there are acceptable limits to their behavior. They can't even begin to admit that they might be held accountable for what they have done. Most of them are young and secretly believe that they are going to live a long and full life and are putting off the inevitable consequences of their nihilistic/ narcissistic life style.
+rockhound570 theist Wow. The "accountable for what they have done" nonsense again?! What a load of rubbish! All of it soundly refuted countless times before, but it won't stop theists from trotting it all out again. " Is it really so hard to believe that God exists?" For many who aren't already *emotionally* attached to the idea, YES. "The main reason that the vast majority of people don't topically believe in God is because he is not present in their living rooms." NO; the main reason is that there is no evidence that any gods, anywhere, have ever been present, in addition to the fact that there is abundant evidence throughout history that people have invented god stories. "the inevitable consequences of their nihilistic/ narcissistic life style" Simple, isn't it? If you don't believe my absurd myth, it's surely the result of your nihilistic/ narcissistic life style! How utterly despicable.
can you please explain why God does not send a clear coherent message to humanity Obviously this supposed God is aware that humanity is killing itself in competing visions of what God wants Why would God not send a coherent message to humanity to unite people in a true vision Why would God create a world with such unnecessary evil such as natural disasters that kill millions and millions of people with no Rhyme or Reason Why would God create a world that is or better yet said a universe that is largely hostile to life and that shows no evidence of being able to support life on a grand scale if your Christian why would God send his son to one remote part of the world in one remote and seemingly random historic Epic and then produced nothing of coherent message to humanity in the last two thousand years Does this make any sense? Or is it more logical that all people have created legends about gods and the nature of reality and these are just stories that people have made up to explain things they didn't understand You haven't seen that historical evidence that all cultures create gods You're unaware of the seemingly irreconcilable nature of reality and creation with natural disasters and the basic hostility to life of the universe Isn't it more logical that people just want everyone to have a coherent vision and therefore proselytize their particular codes of conduct and beliefs Another words religion evolved has a way to bring people together under shared ideas therefore it's a social project But that doesn't mean it has any relationship to fundamental reality And again people don't believe in God for the simple fact that there's no good evidence and it makes no sense that God wouldn't you send a coherent message to humanity
***** what are you talking about? You realize your post makes no sense and it's just stuff almost random babble of barely coherent attempts at being funny or sarcastic or whatever I'm asking a very serious question. A question you should ask as well If there is a God why doesn't this God send a coherent message to humanity Isn't this God aware that humanity is killing each other and has been killing each other for thousands of years over competing visions of what God is and what God wants Isn't this God aware that supposedly people are proclaiming that God has spoken to them and they know what God wants Why wouldn't God just speak to Humanity as a whole You're just replying with the common propaganda that people use to brainwash each other. Most religion is just indoctrination into a club and trying to keep everyone in the club on the same page It's not about really understanding reality or posing meaningful questions about what makes sense. It's about keeping the status quo and maintaining social order You not aware that all cultures have had stories about magical powers and gods and you dismissed the thousands of different cultural stories but for some reason you probably except one oral tradition that has led to the writing of the Bible This makes no sense. Again these are serious questions why would God supposedly appear to a couple of people in human history and perform a couple of miracles in ancient times and sent his son to one remote part of the Earth instead of just sending a clear message to all of Humanity The simple answer is because there is obviously no God we live in a world that's seemingly comes about through natural processes. Science has allowed us to create these computers were on right now. You can make some dumb jokes about having come from slime and all this other silly remarks. But the bottom line is if there is a God it's a pretty sick God to create a world with such tragedy and misery and random suffering. You can try to explain this away as a result of human sin but again that makes no sense with the evidence that the Earth was existing for billions of years with tons of natural disasters before Youmans evolved Anyway I could go on and on but I don't even know why I'm bothering cuz I'm sure you'll just reply with useless ramble about how you have to have faith and I don't understand Let me ask you something when your car breaks down do you pray and does God fix it or do you take it to a mechanic. Do you tell the mechanic he doesn't understand and that it's really all God or do you let him use evidence-based reasoning to fix things. You realize how incoherent your approach to reality is on the one hand you believe in some Supernatural deity who is controlling everything but on the other hand you use scientific methods which have led to computers and Technology which I'm sure you don't really understand but you reap the benefits of the scientific method
***** What do they call some one who says people are *asking for proof of something they are determined not to accept*, even though he has NO PROOF whatsoever that this is the case? What kind of person offers no proof for an amazing claim about a magical, invisible being, and then *criticizes those who have the common sense to ask for evidence?!* What do they call someone who criticises others for talking "About something they know absolutely nothing about" when that person shows NO SIGNS whatsoever that HE knows anything about it?! The arrogance of gullible believers in ancient myths is astounding.
God did send a clear, coherent message....you just automatically dismiss it out of hand because your world view filter screens it out. That revelation was Christ. Yep, just as I suspected, you've already rejected it (bet you are smiling cynically, too). As far as not fully understanding why we live in a world so full of pain (and joy!) and suffering (and gratitude and love!) and misery (and ecstacy and creativity!) , let me ask you this....why have scientists pursued trying to understand how general relativity and quantum mechanics fully interface for the last seventy years without any real success? Why cannot the problem of pain and suffering also be approached the same way? As a deep problem that requires us to grapple with? Atheists keep trotting out the problem of pain and suffering and always willfully neglect the problem of joy and fulfillment. Next, why must God prove to you that He exists through a mechanism that YOU demand that HE use? Of course, I am speaking of empiricism, the only theory of knowledge that atheists insist on using. Here's a challenge. How about you show us a powerful empirical proof that empiricism is the only valid way to know something. You cannot do it. Logical positivism died a quiet death in philosophical circles decades ago but ill informed atheists keep trooting it out because it persuades the ignorant and easily manipulated (who want to be persuaded) that logical positivism still holds. When you can do that, I will revisit your contention that God must somehow squeeze Himself through an empirical filter before I will accept His existence.Next. The condition of life existing on a grand scale is still unknown to us. We have not even found out if our closest planetary neighbors have life or how cmmon life is in the universe. Your point is a non sequiter. Next. Absolutely true that all civilizations create Gods. But your point is a logical fallacy. You assume that ALL gods must be creations of the human mind. But what if the One, True God isn't. Apparently, this simple claim (which needs to be investigated on the evidence at hand) isn't good enough for atheists. You preload your preposistion that God, if named, must be a human creation of the human mind. This is just bad logic. No serious atheist would contend this. This is like saying that all scientific theories are wrong because some have been proven to be wrong and were discarded. An utterly fallacious logical position. Please stop relying upon this argument. It just makes you look foolish.
When did he say anything which may imply 'the end of materialism'? He said that the natural sciences haven't pinned down consciousness yet, and that he can't conceive of the mind existing as a product of the physical brain. Morris is a wonderful scientist and intellectual but it bothers me to see his views misrepresented like this. /watch?v=RS4PW35-Y00
Notice his wordage - "where I am uncertain..", "some philosophers would be reluctant".. "I am not persuaded".. "I don't think.." etc. Intellectual dishonesty does no benefit to your faith.
It’s a bit disappointing when you find out that someone who argues against Materialism is a Christian. There are sufficient philosophical and experiential lines of investigation to challenge Materialism without lapsing into the self-deluding sophistry and double talk that characterises Christian theology. Materiality is just an idea but so are God, soul and all that Christian cosmology.
ObjectiveBob well most of the guests on this channel are Christians. I suspect belief in life after death is part and parcel of Christianity. Hence the desire to believe in the supernatural. No evidence for the supernatural is presented here. “God” is a placeholder for those thing we don’t yet understand. When we have understanding that placeholder is gone. This has been the pattern of god beliefs throughout history.
My OpenMind you said: "Why would we need a soul if theres no such thing as an afterlife?" It sounded like you were accusing me of NOT believing in the afterlife, which is odd.
The reality of God, I would say, with a rigorous understanding of contingency, becomes self-evident. Probability doesn’t even enter into the discussion.
Want to know why there can be no physical cause of the universe? Because anything physical is defined as that which exists. No physical thing can create from nothing, let alone hold itself in being. Check and mate, atheists.
“But have you read A universe from nothing?”
Have you ever worship Dawkins at your personal shrine?
“...”
When briliant scientiest is a christian people said he's moron when clown scientiest is an atheist people said he is smart. LOL.
+rugossss Its all opinion - and most people with those opinions honestly believe that it was self created, whereas it clearly belongs to an adopted system of thought. Some people would rather be certain in their limited views than battle with the question of reality. They reside in the small patch of light that has been created for them, unaware of how deep the dark of ignorance goes.
rugossss
That bugs me as well, I mean I'm a Christian but I never called a person dumb just because he disagrees with me
A very balanced perspective not in much supply nowadays on both sides of the issue. It's getting better but there's still, 10 years later, much room for improvement.
If materialism is true (space, time, matter, and energy is all that exists) , please explain how an emergent thing like consciousness is housed within the simple atoms. And don't default to the silly, goal post shifting argument of "brute facts". Thomas Nagel has realized how incredibly difficult this question is and has come to the conclusion that assuming materialism just might be a reductio ad absurdum, incapable of explaining the complexities of the universe. OK atheists, the gauntlet is down. Crawl out from under your assumptions and give us an empirically powerful explanation of WHY the structure of reality possesses the features that is does.
Why is it that humanity is presumptuous enough to believe that we can explain these questions in the first place? Of course our inquisitiveness into the nature of the Universe and existence itself is bound intrinsically to our consciousness but building an empirical argument for a construct, which we view from an infinitesimally small viewpoint, seems beyond optimistic. I am personally agnostic and so believe that, Everything that exists seems rather too complex to be just an accident. However, to chose to 'worship' or 'believe in' scientific rational explanation or to 'worship' or 'believe in' religion requires an individual's conscious choice. As a Christian, and not erudite in the various world religions, it seems to me that if any 'God(s)' exist(s) s/he/it/they would be beyond the psychological need of our veneration. From our 'snapshot' of reality how could we possibly fathom concepts/realities/aspects which probably exist when we probably do not have the senses or intellect to perceive or comprehend them?
I'm a big fan of S.Morris work. He's a brilliant scientist and makes very good arguments for the 'invisible landscape' that allows natural selection to build creature design. I'm a bit surprised though, that he is a christian, and in particular, seems to believe in a literal resurrection (of Jesus). In the biblical story, whether there were so called 'eye witnesses' to the resurrection is irrelavant. Some people today actually believe that preachers are actually performing miracles on TV, like Benny H. Are their testimonies reliable? Of course not.
Yep I am also big fan of S.C.Morris and mostly his convergence theory and I am also stunned to get to know that he is religious. However... it seems to me (from what I've heard) that he simply doesn't want to offend some grandma which is still walking on our dear earth. The guy is 2 smart INDEED !
For a philosopher to dissociate the mind from the brain is a leap given that modifying the brain modifies consciousness.
Modifying the brain modifies what we are conscious OF. There's an unfortunate confusion, in discussing this subject, between the phenomenon of experience and its content.
modifying the brain does NOT modify consciousness...look at it from a disease point of view..a person with severe alzheimer's (and my grandma has the disease) where by the brain is being destroyed by a disease still has full working consciousness..my grandma still has full lucid consciousness...
some would say well her mind has been modified then...again this is wrong...it is not her mind that is modified ..it's just that the tool (the brain) is being destroyed by a disease so mind is unable to function properly within that destroyed tool..it's a bit like saying when you smash a TV set, you disrupt the picture on the screen but you do NOT affect the actual essence of what you are seeing..the channel still exists...the same applies to the brain.
It's a mistake to base a faith on "facts".
People used to believe in Zeus because they noticed lightning.
When the truth was discovered, they lost their faith.
Prof Morris' belief in Christ hinges around the resurrection, as does the belief of all of us that are Christian. Is it really so hard to believe that God exists? The main reason that the vast majority of people don't topically believe in God is because he is not present in their living rooms. This empirical approach to knowledge is adopted by just about everyone who is retreating from things they don't want to even try to acknowledge as a possibility. I have yet to see any defense of this philosophical idea (empiricism) from any person that trolls these sights in order to debunk Christianity. The real reason people reject even the possibility of God? They don't want to admit that there are acceptable limits to their behavior. They can't even begin to admit that they might be held accountable for what they have done. Most of them are young and secretly believe that they are going to live a long and full life and are putting off the inevitable consequences of their nihilistic/ narcissistic life style.
+rockhound570 theist Wow. The "accountable for what they have done" nonsense again?!
What a load of rubbish! All of it soundly refuted countless times before, but it won't stop theists from trotting it all out again.
" Is it really so hard to believe that God exists?"
For many who aren't already *emotionally* attached to the idea, YES.
"The main reason that the vast majority of people don't topically believe in God is because he is not present in their living rooms."
NO; the main reason is that there is no evidence that any gods, anywhere, have ever been present, in addition to the fact that there is abundant evidence throughout history that people have invented god stories.
"the inevitable consequences of their nihilistic/ narcissistic life style"
Simple, isn't it? If you don't believe my absurd myth, it's surely the result of your nihilistic/ narcissistic life style!
How utterly despicable.
can you please explain why God does not send a clear coherent message to humanity
Obviously this supposed God is aware that humanity is killing itself in competing visions of what God wants
Why would God not send a coherent message to humanity to unite people in a true vision
Why would God create a world with such unnecessary evil such as natural disasters that kill millions and millions of people with no Rhyme or Reason
Why would God create a world that is or better yet said a universe that is largely hostile to life and that shows no evidence of being able to support life on a grand scale
if your Christian why would God send his son to one remote part of the world in one remote and seemingly random historic Epic and then produced nothing of coherent message to humanity in the last two thousand years
Does this make any sense?
Or is it more logical that all people have created legends about gods and the nature of reality and these are just stories that people have made up to explain things they didn't understand
You haven't seen that historical evidence that all cultures create gods
You're unaware of the seemingly irreconcilable nature of reality and creation with natural disasters and the basic hostility to life of the universe
Isn't it more logical that people just want everyone to have a coherent vision and therefore proselytize their particular codes of conduct and beliefs
Another words religion evolved has a way to bring people together under shared ideas therefore it's a social project
But that doesn't mean it has any relationship to fundamental reality
And again people don't believe in God for the simple fact that there's no good evidence and it makes no sense that God wouldn't you send a coherent message to humanity
***** what are you talking about? You realize your post makes no sense and it's just stuff almost random babble of barely coherent attempts at being funny or sarcastic or whatever
I'm asking a very serious question. A question you should ask as well
If there is a God why doesn't this God send a coherent message to humanity
Isn't this God aware that humanity is killing each other and has been killing each other for thousands of years over competing visions of what God is and what God wants
Isn't this God aware that supposedly people are proclaiming that God has spoken to them and they know what God wants
Why wouldn't God just speak to Humanity as a whole
You're just replying with the common propaganda that people use to brainwash each other.
Most religion is just indoctrination into a club and trying to keep everyone in the club on the same page
It's not about really understanding reality or posing meaningful questions about what makes sense. It's about keeping the status quo and maintaining social order
You not aware that all cultures have had stories about magical powers and gods and you dismissed the thousands of different cultural stories but for some reason you probably except one oral tradition that has led to the writing of the Bible
This makes no sense.
Again these are serious questions why would God supposedly appear to a couple of people in human history and perform a couple of miracles in ancient times and sent his son to one remote part of the Earth instead of just sending a clear message to all of Humanity
The simple answer is because there is obviously no God we live in a world that's seemingly comes about through natural processes. Science has allowed us to create these computers were on right now.
You can make some dumb jokes about having come from slime and all this other silly remarks. But the bottom line is if there is a God it's a pretty sick God to create a world with such tragedy and misery and random suffering.
You can try to explain this away as a result of human sin but again that makes no sense with the evidence that the Earth was existing for billions of years with tons of natural disasters before Youmans evolved
Anyway I could go on and on but I don't even know why I'm bothering cuz I'm sure you'll just reply with useless ramble about how you have to have faith and I don't understand
Let me ask you something when your car breaks down do you pray and does God fix it or do you take it to a mechanic. Do you tell the mechanic he doesn't understand and that it's really all God or do you let him use evidence-based reasoning to fix things. You realize how incoherent your approach to reality is on the one hand you believe in some Supernatural deity who is controlling everything but on the other hand you use scientific methods which have led to computers and Technology which I'm sure you don't really understand but you reap the benefits of the scientific method
***** What do they call some one who says people are *asking for proof of something they are determined not to accept*, even though he has NO PROOF whatsoever that this is the case?
What kind of person offers no proof for an amazing claim about a magical, invisible being, and then *criticizes those who have the common sense to ask for evidence?!*
What do they call someone who criticises others for talking "About something they know absolutely nothing about" when that person shows NO SIGNS whatsoever that HE knows anything about it?!
The arrogance of gullible believers in ancient myths is astounding.
God did send a clear, coherent message....you just automatically dismiss it out of hand because your world view filter screens it out. That revelation was Christ. Yep, just as I suspected, you've already rejected it (bet you are smiling cynically, too). As far as not fully understanding why we live in a world so full of pain (and joy!) and suffering (and gratitude and love!) and misery (and ecstacy and creativity!) , let me ask you this....why have scientists pursued trying to understand how general relativity and quantum mechanics fully interface for the last seventy years without any real success? Why cannot the problem of pain and suffering also be approached the same way? As a deep problem that requires us to grapple with? Atheists keep trotting out the problem of pain and suffering and always willfully neglect the problem of joy and fulfillment. Next, why must God prove to you that He exists through a mechanism that YOU demand that HE use? Of course, I am speaking of empiricism, the only theory of knowledge that atheists insist on using. Here's a challenge. How about you show us a powerful empirical proof that empiricism is the only valid way to know something. You cannot do it. Logical positivism died a quiet death in philosophical circles decades ago but ill informed atheists keep trooting it out because it persuades the ignorant and easily manipulated (who want to be persuaded) that logical positivism still holds. When you can do that, I will revisit your contention that God must somehow squeeze Himself through an empirical filter before I will accept His existence.Next. The condition of life existing on a grand scale is still unknown to us. We have not even found out if our closest planetary neighbors have life or how cmmon life is in the universe. Your point is a non sequiter. Next. Absolutely true that all civilizations create Gods. But your point is a logical fallacy. You assume that ALL gods must be creations of the human mind. But what if the One, True God isn't. Apparently, this simple claim (which needs to be investigated on the evidence at hand) isn't good enough for atheists. You preload your preposistion that God, if named, must be a human creation of the human mind. This is just bad logic. No serious atheist would contend this. This is like saying that all scientific theories are wrong because some have been proven to be wrong and were discarded. An utterly fallacious logical position. Please stop relying upon this argument. It just makes you look foolish.
Another casualty of cultural imprinting and psychological weakness. Sad, really.
Are you talking about yourself or SCW?
@@jezmac1882 himself lol xD :)
Hallucigenia
Really sad to see such brilliant scientific taking part in this religious or new age mambo jambo
+Bajou Samir Then investigate the phenomenon and work out what is going on.
Better than fundy atheist mumbo jumbo
Better than fundy atheist mumbo jumbo
+Bajou Samir
I find it sad that some otherwise intelligent people believe in materialist rubbish.
Bajou Samir
This isn't Mumbo jumbo
Most physicists reject materialism because quantum mechanics falsifies it
When did he say anything which may imply 'the end of materialism'? He said that the natural sciences haven't pinned down consciousness yet, and that he can't conceive of the mind existing as a product of the physical brain. Morris is a wonderful scientist and intellectual but it bothers me to see his views misrepresented like this.
/watch?v=RS4PW35-Y00
Notice his wordage - "where I am uncertain..", "some philosophers would be reluctant".. "I am not persuaded".. "I don't think.." etc.
Intellectual dishonesty does no benefit to your faith.
It’s a bit disappointing when you find out that someone who argues against Materialism is a Christian. There are sufficient philosophical and experiential lines of investigation to challenge Materialism without lapsing into the self-deluding sophistry and double talk that characterises Christian theology.
Materiality is just an idea but so are God, soul and all that Christian cosmology.
This channel is devoted to complete and utter nonsense.
My OpenMind
No, it's devoted to pissing you off, and it's working :)
ObjectiveBob lol, seriously though. Can we have some evidence for the soul?
Why would we need a soul if there’s no such thing as an afterlife?
My OpenMind
who said there's no such thing as an afterlife?
ObjectiveBob well most of the guests on this channel are Christians. I suspect belief in life after death is part and parcel of Christianity.
Hence the desire to believe in the supernatural. No evidence for the supernatural is presented here.
“God” is a placeholder for those thing we don’t yet understand. When we have understanding that placeholder is gone. This has been the pattern of god beliefs throughout history.
My OpenMind
you said: "Why would we need a soul if theres no such thing as an afterlife?"
It sounded like you were accusing me of NOT believing in the afterlife, which is odd.