Author Topic: Argument From Consciousness  (Read 2158 times)

Offline Shiranu

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #30 on: December 03, 2018, 12:03:54 AM »
Quote
The universe, with no one around to observe it, does not exist.

Evidence please.

Quote
Without free will, you are just a passenger on the road of life. You exhibit no influence over the body you are in. I cannot see how one can find happiness, when they do not find the self valuable.

Agency =/= value.

You would not find a partner valuable because you have control over them; quite contrarily, it's your lack of control over a partner that enhances their value.

I don't find that a like-for-like argument, but it's just meant to point out that having control over something is not inherently good or valuable, nor is being powerless inherently bad or worthless.

Quote
If no one experiences something, it has no value.

You have told us that we are the one's who argue life is with out value, and yet the core argument you seem to keep on making is that the universe is inherently valueless. You simply are substituting man giving it value with god giving it value... but either way it requires a conscious entity to give value to that which is valueless.

But it remains the same end result; that value is being placed on it rather being intrinsically a part of it, and value is an abstract concept that doesn't actually exist. Be it man or be it god value still is just a fancy word to help conceptualize a much more abstract aspect of existence. But if we completely dismissed the idea of value, if we purged any understanding of it from our minds, reality would be exactly the same as it was before.

I would say you put far too much value in there being value, and too much meaning in the concept of meaning.
"Judge a moth by the beauty of its candle." - Rumi

Online Hydra009

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #31 on: December 03, 2018, 01:04:50 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If no one experiences something, it has no value. The universe, before humanity and without God, has no value.
A very suspiciously me-entric stance.

Quote
However, to you, the thing that is more powerful and significant, or at least exhibits stronger influence, is the part that has no value. That is the material world.
Well, the material world is a rather large and formidable place.  It is also the only place with forums where you can say how worthless it is (to you).

A lot of people have said that other realms exist.  And a lot of people have said a lot of things with little understanding or evidence or sanity.

Quote
But what is value, anyway? Perhaps the universe contains value, and it is part of a language that we cannot understand. This argument is meaningless to me, but if you have something to say about it then be my guest.
Nah.  I agree.  It is certainly meaningless.

Quote
I see the universe as a program being run by a divine operating system.
Good for you, I guess.

Quote
The physical world is not really real


That's where you lose me (and reality).
« Last Edit: December 03, 2018, 01:22:01 AM by Hydra009 »

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #32 on: December 03, 2018, 01:52:45 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Evidence please.

Agency =/= value.

You would not find a partner valuable because you have control over them; quite contrarily, it's your lack of control over a partner that enhances their value.

I don't find that a like-for-like argument, but it's just meant to point out that having control over something is not inherently good or valuable, nor is being powerless inherently bad or worthless.

You have told us that we are the one's who argue life is with out value, and yet the core argument you seem to keep on making is that the universe is inherently valueless. You simply are substituting man giving it value with god giving it value... but either way it requires a conscious entity to give value to that which is valueless.

But it remains the same end result; that value is being placed on it rather being intrinsically a part of it, and value is an abstract concept that doesn't actually exist. Be it man or be it god value still is just a fancy word to help conceptualize a much more abstract aspect of existence. But if we completely dismissed the idea of value, if we purged any understanding of it from our minds, reality would be exactly the same as it was before.

I would say you put far too much value in there being value, and too much meaning in the concept of meaning.

Referring to the comment about needing evidence to support the view that the world would not exist without being observed, what would happen if there was no one to observe the evidence?

I didn't say the world was valueless, on the contrary I think it is full of meaning. I don't find any one concept in itself to be inherently valuable or invaluable so I find a comparison to not having control over your partner weird.

Experience is valuable, and I don't think it needs to have some sort of conscious acknowledgment that what you are experiencing is valuable in order to be considered valuable.

That's my opinion to counter your opinion.

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #33 on: December 03, 2018, 01:55:36 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
A very suspiciously me-entric stance.
Well, the material world is a rather large and formidable place.  It is also the only place with forums where you can say how worthless it is (to you).

A lot of people have said that other realms exist.  And a lot of people have said a lot of things with little understanding or evidence or sanity.
Nah.  I agree.  It is certainly meaningless.
Good for you, I guess.


That's where you lose me (and reality).

You can say that the physical world is real, but what is really real is your experience of the physical world. And that experience is internal, within you.

Offline Shiranu

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #34 on: December 03, 2018, 02:21:12 AM »
Quote
... what would happen if there was no one to observe the evidence?

The same thing that happens if no one observes it.

No one observed the beginning (assuming it has one) of the universe, and yet the the universe exists.

Quote
I didn't say the world was valueless, on the contrary I think it is full of meaning.

But only because you believe there is something that gives it meaning, rather than it having innate meaning. Which means it is, by default, meaningless.

Quote
I don't find any one concept in itself to be inherently valuable or invaluable so I find a comparison to not having control over your partner weird.

It wasn't a statement of what you believe.

You said that without free-will, life loses value. I responded that free-will, or control, does not necessarily equate to value... nor does lack of free-will (control) equate to a lack of value.

Quote
Experience is valuable, and I don't think it needs to have some sort of conscious acknowledgment that what you are experiencing is valuable in order to be considered valuable.

Experience can also be without value. It's all relative.
"Judge a moth by the beauty of its candle." - Rumi

Offline Shiranu

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #35 on: December 03, 2018, 02:27:41 AM »
Quote
You can say that the physical world is real, but what is really real is your experience of the physical world. And that experience is internal, within you.

To a Western mind, sure. In Eastern tradition it is often held that... in very simplistic and probably very layman's understanding terms... that experience is universal; the concept of "I" is a way of pretending we are separate from the rest of reality. What you said would run antithesis to the core tenants of Eastern mythology.

Almost all modern Eastern theological mythology revolves around dissolving the concept of an internal experience; nirvana is achieved by realizing that all experience is one universal entity rather than infinite, separate things.

Alot of your ideology does seem to revolve around, as Hydra pointed out, "I, me, mine"... that the self is the end all, be all of understanding. Studying both Western and Eastern ideology, I find that a bit short-sighted, but I understand that is the common mindset now. But even in Western tradition there are many philosophies that stress the importance of recognizing universal experience rather than the personal experience.
"Judge a moth by the beauty of its candle." - Rumi

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #36 on: December 03, 2018, 02:35:51 AM »
When you fall asleep, you become unconscious. When you take a blow to the head, you can lose consciousness. If you become blackout drunk, your consciousness becomes limited. Clearly, consciousness is something that is produced by the brain. If there were some invisible soul producing our consciousness, then why would the status of the brain affect our consciousness? Why should we even assume that a soul exists in the first place?
"Oh, wearisome condition of humanity,
Born under one law, to another bound;
Vainly begot, and yet forbidden vanity,
Created sick, commanded to be sound."
--Fulke Greville

Offline Baruch

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #37 on: December 03, 2018, 02:43:43 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You can say that the physical world is real, but what is really real is your experience of the physical world. And that experience is internal, within you.

Without subjectivity, objectivity is meaningless.  Unless you are Plato.
πŽπŽœπŽœπŽŸπŽŒπŽ€πŽπŽŽπŽ€πŽ€πŽšπŽ€πŽŸπŽπŽœπŽœπŽŸπŽπŽ€πŽπŽ‰πŽ€πŽ€πŽšπŽ€
luu shalmaata luu balt’aata
May you be well, may you be healthy

Offline Baruch

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #38 on: December 03, 2018, 02:45:18 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When you fall asleep, you become unconscious. When you take a blow to the head, you can lose consciousness. If you become blackout drunk, your consciousness becomes limited. Clearly, consciousness is something that is produced by the brain. If there were some invisible soul producing our consciousness, then why would the status of the brain affect our consciousness? Why should we even assume that a soul exists in the first place?

The brain is involved, but seldom used ;-)
πŽπŽœπŽœπŽŸπŽŒπŽ€πŽπŽŽπŽ€πŽ€πŽšπŽ€πŽŸπŽπŽœπŽœπŽŸπŽπŽ€πŽπŽ‰πŽ€πŽ€πŽšπŽ€
luu shalmaata luu balt’aata
May you be well, may you be healthy

Offline SGOS

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #39 on: December 03, 2018, 08:42:47 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
There is no evolutionary advantage to the advent of consciousness, in fact, it may even be a disadvantage. Was there consciousness at the beginning of the universe? The atheist view is that there was not. If consciousness is an evolutionary advantage, in that it takes the intelligence of a sentient being to run the body of an organism when it reaches a certainty complexity, why was there no consciousness at the beginning of creation? Doesn't it take something special to create that kind of occurrence?
This is a highly logical argument that can be better affirmed with a footnote or two that would stop any unbeliever in his tracks. 

Basically:

"If we have consciousness which is an evolutionary advantage...



Therefore a conscious creator runs the consciousness."

Admittedly these two statements by themselves are non sequitur, but notice I have left three empty spaces which can be filled with undisputed arguments and backed by the heavy lifting already performed by philosophers from antiquity to modern day.  It can be expanded to many spaces, as it deserves space for all the highly intellectual and undisputable claims readily available to a logical mind.

To begin, it draws upon the previous work found in the ontological argument, "that than which nothing greater can be thought...",  see Anselm, 1078, Canterbury, which is roughly equivalent to "if I imagine it, there must be a greater being that allows me to imagine it.  There is no need to present Anselm's work in it's entirety.  We all know that in philosophical and intellectual circles, he was no slouch.  Indeed he was an Archbishop, and his ideas were expanded further by subsequent thinkers such as Rene Descartes, Liebnez, and Alvin Plantinga  Suffice it to say, much of the heavy lifting has already been done for you.  It just needs to be noted.

Your two statements can also be connected logically, by crediting William Paley's argument from the Devine Watchmaker, which has also withstood the tests of time, even while being savagely attacked by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins who disgraced himself in front of the world by arguing against it in his satirical spoof, The Blind Watchmaker.

More modern yet are the great works of respected creationist thinkers like Ken Hamm, Falwell, and Robertson, whose massive wealth bestowed upon them by a righteous god attests to existence of a supreme creator.

These and other arguments of your own can fill the space between the statement and conclusion above.  The more arguments the better, because any first year student of logic knows that a logical argument needs at least three lines.  By increasing the number of lines, the logic is strengthened exponentially.

Good luck with your fine work, and fear not adversity.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2018, 08:52:47 AM by SGOS »

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #40 on: December 03, 2018, 09:16:26 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The universe is but a shared living space for us to interact with. If no one experiences something, it has no value. The universe, before humanity and without God, has no value.

However, to you, the thing that is more powerful and significant, or at least exhibits stronger influence, is the part that has no value. That is the material world.

But what is value, anyway? Perhaps the universe contains value, and it is part of a language that we cannot understand. This argument is meaningless to me, but if you have something to say about it then be my guest.

It takes a conscious being to make decisions, to have thoughts and perceive ideas, and to experience. I see the universe as a program being run by a divine operating system. The physical world is not really real, I interact with it, but it is part of an experience I am sharing with other people. It is some sort of framework for interacting with other souls.
Those are your opinions.  Of course, you are entitled to those.  But I disagree with all of your assumptions.  Just because you cannot understand something, cannot fathom something, does not make it so or not so.  What you term 'value' I term wishful believing.  You want something to be, therefore it is.  No.  The universe exists whether or not you are in it.  It exists even if Earth were to blow up.  It existed long before you were and will exist long after you leave.  And it is the only real thing there is--there is nothing supernatural about it; nor does your life encounter anything supernatural.  If it exists, it is natural.  If it does not exist then it is fiction.  Your god, no matter how you describe it, is fiction. 

Consciousness is part of the evolutionary process.  It allows a species a better chance of survival.  Our consciousness gives us awareness in the form of our senses.  Those senses are quite limited when compared to many other species.  Those species use their awarnesses to give them a better chance to survive within the niche they are in; they have evolved those senses to allow them to fit into whatever environment they are in.  Humans are not unique in that respect--or almost any other respect.  And the universe is simply unaware or any of this.  The universe places no premium (or anything else) on what you think of as value.  It is totally and completely neutral--it just is.  Nature on this planet is the same--it just is; neither good nor bad, it just is.  And your god is still simply a fiction.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Offline the_antithesis

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #41 on: December 03, 2018, 01:29:57 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
My definition of God is being with consciousness only, who created the universe.

How does consciousness only work? This sounds more like that goofy thought experiment thing that people always do, like infinity plus one or being outside or beyond the universe. These are large or unintuitive concepts to most people so they treat them like other things, like a hat or something but it doesn't work and tells us nothing except the person has no understanding of the fundamentals of the thing they are talking about.

I find the idea that any notion of god creating the universe to be uninteresting. This is along the same line as first cause arguments. Why? Is there no other reason to think gods exist other than you have no idea how else the universe could be here? For shame! For shame!

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #42 on: December 03, 2018, 01:41:03 PM »
"I can't imagine how it happened, so God must have done it!"

We hear "arguments" like this a lot - argumentum ad ignorantiam - and they never get any better.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If something cannot logically exist due to incompatible properties, then it does not exist. The God of the Bible has such incompatible properties, and so it does not exist.    You are not allowed to view links. Register or Loginο»Ώ

Online Hydra009

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #43 on: December 03, 2018, 02:01:26 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I find the idea that any notion of god creating the universe to be uninteresting. This is along the same line as first cause arguments. Why? Is there no other reason to think gods exist other than you have no idea how else the universe could be here? For shame! For shame!
Imo, the "unknown --> godidit" idea assumes more intellectual curiosity on the part of believers than is warranted.  Compared to using God to make sense of the universe, it's just as likely that believers are starting out with the idea of a creator god (by starting out I mean post-indoctrination) and presupposing reasons that this god exists.  Gaps in our knowledge are convenient places to put this creator god, and there's none bigger than the beginning of the universe, plus it's a thematic fit.  Rather than a genuine attempt to understand the universe, this is just an attempt to make an indoctrinated belief seem rational.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2018, 02:43:34 PM by Hydra009 »

Re: Argument From Consciousness
« Reply #44 on: December 03, 2018, 03:08:37 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
To a Western mind, sure. In Eastern tradition it is often held that... in very simplistic and probably very layman's understanding terms... that experience is universal; the concept of "I" is a way of pretending we are separate from the rest of reality. What you said would run antithesis to the core tenants of Eastern mythology.

Almost all modern Eastern theological mythology revolves around dissolving the concept of an internal experience; nirvana is achieved by realizing that all experience is one universal entity rather than infinite, separate things.

Alot of your ideology does seem to revolve around, as Hydra pointed out, "I, me, mine"... that the self is the end all, be all of understanding. Studying both Western and Eastern ideology, I find that a bit short-sighted, but I understand that is the common mindset now. But even in Western tradition there are many philosophies that stress the importance of recognizing universal experience rather than the personal experience.

Yes, I have spent a bunch of time philosophizing with solipsism. So I agree with that. But I don't consider it a shortcoming.

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk