Henke 2022ax

Lundahl (2022j) and Lewis (1960) Continue to Fail to Demonstrate that There is Anything Beyond Nature (Our Universe)

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]

In Henke (2022ap), I briefly discussed the “hard problem of consciousness” and cited Dennett (2018) as a rebuttal.

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

“Since Henke has so far failed to understand how chapter three links reason to something beyond nature, I do not feel inclined to take his word for it. Yes, we have made discoveries. But this does not prove that the we - plural instances of I - doing discoveries is brain chemistry. The question is not whether the supernatural is in the explanation, but whether it is required to explain the explainer's ability to make even a completely naturalistic explanation.”

There is no known “link” between reason and something “beyond nature” because Mr. Lundahl and Lewis (1960) have totally failed to demonstrate that there is anything “beyond nature.” Again, Mr. Lundahl has the burden of evidence to demonstrate that there is something “beyond nature”; that is, beyond our Universe. However, he has no evidence, but only groundless speculation and proclamations. Furthermore, as discussed in Henke (2022ap), Dennett (2006), Dennett (2018) and Harris (2010) argue that there’s no reason to invoke the supernatural to explain consciousness or reason. Now, Mr. Lundahl can look up my and other references. Rather than just making baseless speculations and proclamations about the need for something “beyond nature”, maybe, for once, he’ll actually find evidence that human reasoning and human discoveries require something “beyond nature” and demonstrate that I’m wrong. If he succeeds in providing such well-confirmed and definitive evidence, I’ll admit that I was wrong and join his side. Meanwhile, Lewis (1960) is not a competent source on 21^st century views of consciousness.

All of the evidence indicates that the great discoveries that humans have made is solely due to the biochemical activity in our brains despite the groundless claims from Lewis (1960) and Mr. Lundahl that desperately want to believe otherwise. If Mr. Lundahl wants us to recognize that there’s “something beyond nature” before we can even make “a completely naturalistic explanation”, he again has the burden of evidence. While we can measure electrical activity in the human brain as it thinks (e.g., Goodenough et al. 1998, p. 202), there’s not a shred of evidence that anything supernatural or “beyond nature” is required before we can adequately understand human consciousness (Dennett 2006; Dennett 2018; Harris 2010). There’s no evidence that physicists needed any participation from a god or heaven to discover that E=mc² or F=ma, and to confirm the reliability of those equations. Until Mr. Lundahl or another individual demonstrates otherwise, claims about the supernatural are completely superfluous when effectively doing science and other reasoning.

References

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

Dennett, D.C. 2018. “Facing Up to the Hard Question of Consciousness”: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, v. 373, 20170342.

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

Goodenough, J., R.A. Wallace, and B. McGuire. 1998. Human Biology: Personal, Environmental, and Social Concerns: Saunders College Publishing: Harcourt Brace College Publishers: Fort Worth, TX, USA.

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