Again, Where’s the Evidence that Anything Exists Beyond Our Universe?
Kevin R. Henke
October 9, 2022
In Henke (2022b) and Henke (2022au), I quoted Lundahl (2022a) and said the following:
“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 (2022s) then gives the following response to my bolded statement:
“No, Lewis did very much not question Henke's ability to understand Henke's surroundings while Henke is naturalist. Lewis questioned Henke's ability to understand beyond the surroundings if naturalism is true. Irrespectively of Henke's beliefs. And concludes from there that Henke's belief in naturalism is at odds with Henke's claim that this belief is a species of understanding. Because you see, naturalism or supranaturalism are very definitely not about our surroundings. The correct assessment of whatever experiments Pinker [2007] based his views on (Pinker's or the Christian one) is also not about our surroundings. And the moment when the Castile formation was formed is not included in Stef Heerema's or Kevin R. Henke's surroundings. Any claim to understand that is a claim of understanding beyond the surroundings.”
Actually, Mr. Lundahl and I have covered this topic before in Henke (2022aw), only that we talked about “our environment” instead of “our surroundings.” Nevertheless, the meanings are the same. In Henke (2022b), I stated:
“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.”
Lundahl (2022j) then briefly replies:
If this were all, how could they be reliable, when going beyond our environment? [his emphasis]
Here is how I responded to Lundahl (2022j) in Henke (2022aw):
“When I talk about the environment, I’m referring to our Universe. For example, astronomers look at the chemistry of stars and see the same elements that we see on Earth (e.g., Delsemme 1998). They also see the same physics going on in distant stars and galaxies. Human societies and everything else on Earth are also part of our Universe. Some scientists have speculated about multiverses, but, so far, no evidence has been found to demonstrate that they exist.
Now, before Lundahl (2022j) can talk about anything “beyond our environment”, he first needs to demonstrate that anything actually exists beyond our environment; that is, beyond our Universe. Lewis (1960) failed to demonstrate that Heaven or any other supernatural realm exists and, so far, Mr. Lundahl has not done any better.”
I would also argue that when I mentioned “surroundings” in Henke (2022b) that could potentially include any location in nature or our physical Universe. By the way, Mr. Lundahl and I should notice that Lewis (1960) frequently talks about Nature and our Universe, but where does he mention anything about “surroundings” except on page 187?
Lundahl (2022s) further claims that the origin of the Castile Formation was not part of my or my opponent’s Stef Heerema's “surroundings.” Now, the Castile Formation is located in western Texas and southeastern New Mexico, USA. Although I have never been to an outcrop of the Castile Formation or seen well cores of the formation, others have. It has been part of their “surroundings.” Using forensic methods, geologists have successfully deciphered the origin of the Castile Formation. We understand how it formed in compliance with the known laws of chemistry and physics, and it’s totally incompatible with Flood geology and young-Earth creationism, see here. Whether they are forensic scientists at a crime scene, archeologists at a Mayan ruin or geologists at an outcrop, scientists can use the remaining evidence of past events to understand the events without actually having been there.
I’ve also never been to Japan. It’s never been part of my immediate surroundings. Yet, others live there and we have forensic evidence of ancient Japanese history. So, for others, Japan and its history are part of their “surroundings.”
As I stated before, astronomers have successfully understood many of the properties of stars in distant galaxies through their knowledge of the laws of chemistry and physics. Those stars were part of the astronomers’ “surroundings.” Considering that scientists have studied our Universe on scales that range from the subatomic to billions of light years from Earth, and all the way back to the Big Bang, potentially any part of the physical Universe or nature could become part of our “surroundings.” So, where is the evidence of anything “beyond our surroundings” that Mr. Lundahl keeps talking about? Where’s his evidence that there is anything beyond our Universe or what existed, if anything, “before” the Big Bang?
No matter whether we refer to our Universe as nature, our environment, or our surroundings, Lundahl (2022s) and his understanding of Lewis (1960) are out-of-date, incorrect and based on a total misunderstanding of the scientific method. Certainly, our knowledge of nature and its laws of chemistry and physics is incomplete, as I have admitted many times (e.g., Henke 2022x, Henke 2022ar, Henke 2022fz), but we know enough about nature and its laws to go to the Moon and develop a wide range of successful technologies. We didn’t need to rely on the supernatural or anything “beyond our surroundings” to accomplish these feats. So, there’s no need to invoke ghosts, spirits, souls, or anything else supernatural to explain how the Universe or Nature works. Mr. Lundahl needs to finally present evidence of the supernatural or anything “beyond our surroundings” before he can actually claim that they exist.
References:
Delsemme, A. 1998. Our Cosmic Origins: From the Big Bang to the Emergence of Life and Intelligence: Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 322pp.
Lewis, C.S. 1960. Miracles, 2nd ed., printed 1974: Harper One: HarperCollinsPublishers, 294pp.
Pinker, Steven (29 January 2007). "The Brain: The Mystery of Consciousness". Time Magazine. (accessed October 7, 2022).