The core contradiction which turned C.S. Lewis from atheism to belief in God
Yet
materialism is at odds not only with the laws and documentable patterns of
cosmological evolution.[1] It furthermore also contradicts the laws of
rationality. Materialism rejects not
only the existence of God, but spirits of any kind in any context. Now if that doesn’t seem so important to “non-religious”
readers, I urge you to think again! By
adding the suffix “ism” to the word “material,” the term materialism”
means nothing exists at all except matter.
The logical fallout from materialism threatens to be the metaphorical “death
” of every single human with respect to their personhood. According to materialism, what we call our
thoughts and also our sense of consciousness and self, are merely illusory. Atheist, Dr. Daniel Dennett, in a lecture on YouTube
promoting his materialistic interpretation of “con-sciousness,” said that what
human beings imagine to be consciousness consists purely of impressions
produced by the complex operations of mechanistic computers in the brain
(17:50). He further added, “There is
no little man in the brain (11:35) … What lies in ‘the middle’ is a
virtual self (15:43)…an abstrac-tion (16:05) … Inside the ghost [of
a machine?] is a robot” (17:50).[2] In summary, the events occurring in our
brains are not intellectual ponderings and insights, but rather merely electro-chemical
firings across the chasms between our brain’s billions of synapses. Yet when these phenomena, which are document-table,
are arbitrarily severed from connectivity to spirits (souls), they utterly
contradict what humans have always assumed occurs during internal reflection. On the one hand, electro-chemical events,
with-out exception, necessarily align with the invariable and repetitious laws
of nature, while information on the other hand, in terms of thoughts,
reflections and perceptions, are guided by the specific data and perceptions
that are derived from the almost infinite variety of their sources. In addition, our rational choices of any kind
assume that our perceptions accurately convey phenomenal reality. Yet ascribing such perceptions to merely
physical interactions within the confines of our skeleton overthrows any
plausibility that such desired connections are valid.[3] So notice finally how these processes cannot
be reconciled as if they’re the same process (or similar) since they are
conceptually incompatible.
Now I wish to bring to the table those
contradictions which directly muddle and confound the assertions of the very proponents
of materialism. If materialism (MTLSM)
was an accurate assessment of human experience, it would consequently be
impossible for anyone to know it to be the case since the MTLSM assertions that
are employed for the purpose of dehumanizing humanity as a whole, applies also
to the very ones who advance them. For
by what principle can they exempt themselves from the disparaging anthropological
swipe they brush over humanity as a whole?
“What is good for the goose is good for the gander!” Further, according to MTLM, their
propagandistic agenda to persuade others is rendered utterly pointless since the
notion of a “person” with a free intellect (which is prima facie re-quired in order for any
audience to have the capacity to rethink any views at all) simply does not
exist.
For these reasons, it isn’t humans
who are hastening the loss of personhood, but anti-humane materialism, which has
here been as discredited on both scientific and logical grounds. Firstly, although, up until the early mid-20th
century, the cosmos was deemed (or assumed) to be self-existent for reasons of
being without beginning or end; the advancement of scientific knowledge since
then has brought that dogmatic view to an end with the dawning reality that the
universe had a beginning at the BB.
Although questions that have no bearing on the fact of the BB
continue, that model is not about to be overthrown since the details which secure
its facticity consist of a pattern of observable evidence.[4] Secondly, anthropological materialism demands
of its proponents that they buy into an array of logical fallacies summed up as
a recurrence of one reductio
absurdum-after-another. It
was this body of absurdities which led Lewis
to repudiate materialism while consequently accepting the existence of God.
[1] As distinguished from Darwinian biological evolution.
[2] Daniel Dennett.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP1nmExfgpg. He states, “There is no inner
show and there is no single inner witness [in the brain]” (11:20). Dennett
initially stated that the dualistic view of the body/soul distinction is a “hopeless
theory” (3:35). ** See also
my paper, “The Case for the Soul” at my website, Op.cit. (3).
[3] Charles Darwin too was skeptical over the capacity of
an evolved brain to yield trustworthy insights.
(www://nature.com/articles/4611173b).
[4] Consider that the two concepts, “pattern” and
“observable,” are organically intertwined. Op.cit. (7).
No comments:
Post a Comment