Sentience Arguement

[RogueScholar]

Maybe not the proper place to ask this, but Is there a proper name for the argument that our sentience or self-awareness is an indication of being created, therefore the necessity of a creator? ("I think therefore I AM" my computers processor "thinks" but does not have self awarness or emotion.)

 

[Chesterton]

I don't believe I've ever seen that argued about mere sentience itself.

 

[trident343]

I don't believe I've ever seen that argued about mere sentience itself.

What do you think?

 

[oi_antz]

my computers processor "thinks" but does not have self awarness or emotion.)

Cleverbot has always disagreed with me about that

 

[Tiberius]

Unless you can show that sentience (although I think you mean sapience) can only come about if it is created, then I don't think there's any argument there...

 

[RogueScholar]

Unless you can show that sentience (although I think you mean sapience) can only come about if it is created, then I don't think there's any argument there...

I dont think it can prove a creator directly, but the fact that there are Metaphysical questions science cannot answer, might suggest the need for one. Does the mere fact that one is hungry prove that food exists? No. Yet hunger and food go hand in hand.

My thinking is if we are just a complex bunch of mechanical systems, at what point does this bunch of systems gain self awarness?

If a single cell without conscience is added to another and another and another. At what point does the conscience come into existence? And why does it come into existence?

 

[razeontherock]

I actually see the OP's point, and have always shared that. Yes, I think it directly speaks of G-d. Yes, I think there are many, many Scriptures along these lines ...

 

[Tiberius]

I dont think it can prove a creator directly, but the fact that there are Metaphysical questions science cannot answer, might suggest the need for one. Does the mere fact that one is hungry prove that food exists? No. Yet hunger and food go hand in hand.

My thinking is if we are just a complex bunch of mechanical systems, at what point does this bunch of systems gain self awarness?

If a single cell without conscience is added to another and another and another. At what point does the conscience come into existence? And why does it come into existence?

One could say that anything that would die without food could only exist in a universe where food existed to feed it.

However the fact that there are metaphysical questions that science does not answer does not, in my opinion, imply that there is a god or even a need for a god, in much the same way that the question "Are there any square circles" implies that there is some geometry that we are unaware of.

 

[RogueScholar]

One could say that anything that would die without food could only exist in a universe where food existed to feed it.

However the fact that there are metaphysical questions that science does not answer does not, in my opinion, imply that there is a god or even a need for a god.

So if you admit that science can't explain certain metaphysical realities, would you not at least consider it rational to consider other possibilities?

 

[Tiberius]

So if you admit that science can't explain certain metaphysical realities, would you not at least consider it rational to consider other possibilities?

Two questions...

1. Please define metaphysical.

2. Show that something metaphysical exists in our reality.

 

[Sketcher]

Maybe not the proper place to ask this, but Is there a proper name for the argument that our sentience or self-awareness is an indication of being created, therefore the necessity of a creator? ("I think therefore I AM" my computers processor "thinks" but does not have self awarness or emotion.)

Your computer doesn't think, it calculates.