Henke 2022av

No Evidence that Magic is Involved in the Ability of Humans to Reason

Kevin R. Henke

September 15, 2022

In Henke (2022b), I made the following comments about consciousness:

“Lundahl (2022a) also makes the following statement to me about nature and our consciousness:

“Other takeaway in CSL's [C.S. Lewis’] Miracles, you carry around yourself two very clear indications that nature is not all there is - neither reason nor morality can be reduced to matter and energy affected by each other in accordance with laws of physics and chemistry. The ‘hard problem of consciousness’ - to take it from a somewhat different angle - remains hard. We don't just need an intelligent designer who arranged our brains for optimal consciousness, we need (for purposes we take for granted, like refuting or like blaming) something other than just brain arrangements in our consciousness.”

I fully admit that I’m no expert on consciousness. Contrary to what Lundahl (2022a) and Lewis (1960, his chapter 3, etc.) indicate in this quotation, our thoughts are electrical and our brains are matter. Lewis (1960, chapter 3, etc.) questioned the ability of humans to rationally understand our surroundings through naturalism and he argued that we should seriously consider that miracles occur. However, Lewis (1960) had the burden of evidence to demonstrate his claims for miracles and he failed to do so. Now, investigators are still looking for miracles at revival meetings, among psychics, at supposedly haunted houses, and elsewhere, and not finding any evidence for them.

Who we are, including our reason and moral values, arise from interactions between our brains and our surroundings. We observe, test and confirm with the help of others our conclusions about events in nature. Our brains, thoughts and surroundings are all ultimately controlled by the laws of chemistry and physics. That is, we can imagine what it would be like to be able to magically levitate objects only using our thoughts, but the laws of chemistry and physics don’t actually allow us to do it. Nevertheless, there is a danger that when we recognize that our brains are nothing but matter and energy that we might be tempted to trivialize this electrical activity and think that it has no serious consequences. That is, considering how much damage the electrical activity in Putin’s brain is doing to millions of people in the Ukraine, we cannot underestimate the power of a single human brain to manipulate other humans and weapons in his/her environment. This is why millions of people hope that Putin’s brain soon ceases to function and that more rational and empathetic brains will replace him.

Our morals and reasoning abilities arise in response to our surroundings, including how we interact with other humans. By getting confirmation from our fellow humans and doing experimental testing, we can make reliable discoveries about our environment. We can send spacecraft to Moon, understand why severe earthquakes occur in certain areas and not others, and we understand what causes influenza, etc. The supernatural is not needed to explain these discoveries. Because of the power of the human brain and our ability to adequately understand what’s going on in our surroundings, we can have a huge impact on our surroundings. Unfortunately, humans can also do extensive damage to our environment.

No gods, angels, demons or a Bible are also needed to figure out how people should try to function in our environments. We should develop rules (morality) through reason and not Biblical dogma so that we can live peacefully with each other and our environment. No sane person wants to live in poverty, misery and violence. Ukrainian soldiers are the only sane individuals wanting to move to eastern Ukraine.

We should also recognize that not all brains function well. Mental illness and deficiency are real. As rational research shows, chemicals, traumatic experiences and genetics can certainly cause mental illness. Demons aren’t required.” [my emphasis]

Lundahl (2022j) makes the following reply to my bolded comments:

And the point of Miracles is, neither do these laws allow us to reason, as reasoning is conceived of in philosophy. But stating that "[o]ur brains, thoughts and surroundings are all ultimately controlled by the laws of chemistry and physics" is going beyond survival necessary conclusions of a provisoric [sic] and tactic nature, like "there is probably a fire over there, I see light in the night, I'll be warm" which is about as much as evolutionary factors would actually favour (supposing Evolution had as good prospects as Henke and back then Lewis think). It is in fact the kind of philosophy which only access to universally valid logic would warrant.

I don't think it is too wise to hope for Putin's death, or any man's, unless one meet in clean battle or condemn someone to be hanged to death. In self defense one is not hoping for someone's death, but for the cessation of someone's aggression. Sometimes that coincides with someone's death, sometimes not. But the question at hand is not whether cerebral electro-chemistry can have, if the true explanation for the human mind, momentuous consequences, the question is, whether it can be an apparatus for discovering objective and universally valid truths, both on physical and principled planes (like logic and morality). Henke is not even close to trying to refute C. S. Lewis' chapter 3. It is obvious he prefers ignoring it over reading it, or hopes to have others ignore its actual contents. Perhaps his way of informing himself was to go to a Masonic lodge, hear their gossip about it, and reproduce it here. I do not owe the Freemasonry the kind of reverence that would warrant me just taking that sauce from Mr. Henke. Or perhaps the gossip came from a more informal circle, closer to his academic surroundings, same observation there.

Contrary to Mr. Lundahl’s suggestions, I have no association with the Masonic Lodge or any of their teachings.

The laws of biochemistry and physics most certainly allow our brains to function and our functioning brains allow us to interact with our environments, make observations, reason and philosophize. People cannot reason and philosophize if their brains are dead or malfunctioning.

Now, there’s absolutely no evidence that the supernatural is involved in the functioning of the human brain or our ability to reason, including philosophize (e.g., Harris 2010; Dennett 2006; Henke 2020ap). If Mr. Lundahl wants to provide good evidence that our reasoning abilities require God and the supernatural, I’m open to that. As I’ve said many times before, he has the burden of evidence to support such a claim. However, he’s going to have to do far better than citing the rambling texts in Lewis (1960). I was not impressed with Lewis’ arguments when I read them as a Christian decades ago and after recently rereading them, I still see Lewis’ arguments as flawed and worthless.

When I stated in Henke (2022b) that “Our brains, thoughts and surroundings are all ultimately controlled by the laws of chemistry and physics”, Lundahl (2022j) tries to inject biological evolution into the issue. He’s missing the point. Now, we could discuss Dennett (2006), Harris (2010), and the peer-reviewed literature, and argue about how human evolution can explain why humans behave as they do in a given situation or our ability to philosophize. However, the real issue that I was raising is that our actions are ultimately limited by the laws of chemistry and physics as I pointed out in the very next sentence:

“That is, we can imagine what it would be like to be able to magically levitate objects only using our thoughts, but the laws of chemistry and physics don’t actually allow us to do it.”

Mr. Lundahl’s opinions on the death penalty and the Masons doesn’t interest me. Lundahl (2022j) then asks:

“But the question at hand is not whether cerebral electro-chemistry can have, if the true explanation for the human mind, momentuous consequences, the question is, whether it can be an apparatus for discovering objective and universally valid truths, both on physical and principled planes (like logic and morality). Henke is not even close to trying to refute C. S. Lewis' chapter 3. It is obvious he prefers ignoring it over reading it, or hopes to have others ignore its actual contents.”

Humans discover truths that are objective and universal, or close to it, by simply observing nature and deriving laws and equations to describe nature, such as F = ma or E = mc². These truths came from physicists and the scientific method, and not the Bible or the supernatural. Our morality is based on what allows us to maximize a society that is peaceful, prosperous, and constructive. Nothing is perfect in the U.S., but our Constitution does a pretty good job of giving us a prosperous and democratic society. There’s absolutely no evidence that human reason, logic or morality come from God or anything else supernatural. If Mr. Lundahl has evidence to claim otherwise, I’m interested. Again, I’ve read Lewis (1960) and his arguments are weak and flawed. In particular, as I discussed in Henke (2022ar), the discussions on the behavior of subatomic particles and radioactive decay in Lewis (1960, p. 18-19 in his chapter 3) are especially vague and outdated, and his attempt to downplay the effectiveness of human reasoning is completely unconvincing. Now, I could write a long and detailed commentary on Lewis (1960). But, why should I? Readers can decide for themselves what they think of Lewis (1960). I’m far more interested in knowing if Mr. Lundahl can come up with anything better, more up-to-date and original than the flawed arguments in Lewis (1960). Apparently not.

References

Dennett, D.C. 2006. Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon: Viking Penguin: London, UK, 448pp.

Harris, S. 2010. The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Hunan Values: Free Press: New York, N.Y., USA, 291pp.

Lewis, C.S. 1960. Miracles, 2^nd ed., printed 1974: Harper One: HarperCollinsPublishers, 294pp.