aiki
Regular Member
I think that as far as designers go, I agree that knowing how something is made doesn't preclude a designer.
Right now I'm of the position that there is nothing we have so far discovered in the universe that requires an external designer. I started out with a God of the gaps view, but now I feel that all the gaps are closing. That doesn't mean there isn't a designer, but that so far we don't require one to explain the observable universe.
I'd like to follow up know the brain is not the mind comment. I'm not sure what you mean by that.
Well, how does naturalism account for the fact that there is a universe at all? We know, furthermore, that it began to exist a finite time ago in the past, so it contradicts well-established fact to say the universe has just always existed. But anything that begins to exist has to have been caused. Things don't just appear, uncaused, out of nothing. But this brings us to the First Cause of the universe, the Designer of it, if you will.
Dr. J.P. Moreland has written extensively on the philosophy of Mind and has very formidable arguments against the idea that the brain and the mind are one and the same thing, which is what naturalists are keen to assert. For a very accessible version of his arguments for Mind-Body Dualism (though a rather older version, now) read his book "Scaling the Secular City." Delineating the biochemical and neurological events of the brain as a person thinks and experiences reality does not eradicate the existence of Mind. A neurologist may map the activity of my brain as I smell popcorn but he has no idea of the content of my thoughts as I do unless I tell him.
Selah.
Last edited:
Upvote
0