Repetitious Lecture on Logic in Lundahl (2022s)
Kevin R. Henke
October 10, 2022
In Henke (2022b) and Henke (2022au), I 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.
For instance by rules of logic, like the one given in previous post:
Some animals are dogs,
Lions are animals,
Therefore, lions are dogs.
The improper combination is technically known as an invalid syllogism. The middle term cannot be twice undistributed in a valid one. Now a term can be distributed in two ways : by being subject in a sentence with "all" or "no" or by being predicate in one with "no" or "not all" for the subject. In the major, it is undistributed because it is in a proposition with "some" and not one with "all" and in the minor, it is undistributed as predicate of a proposition that is affirmative and not negative.
That a middle term needs to be distributed in at least one of the premisses of a syllogism is precisely a rule of logic that is universally valid.”
I previously questioned Mr. Lundahl’s claims that there’s anything “beyond our surroundings” or “beyond our environment” (i.e., beyond our Universe) in Henke (2022he) and Henke (2022aw). For some reason unrelated to the issues of surroundings, environments, nature or the Universe, Lundahl (2022s) reintroduces the lions and dogs example that I first mentioned in Henke (2022aj). In Henke (2022aj), I used the following example:
“Similarly, science and valid history must be based on logic. Let’s say on Tuesday, you make the following observation:
Observation #1: Lions are animals.
On Saturday, you make a second observation:
Observation #2: Some animals are dogs.
Anyone with a superficial knowledge of biology knows that both of these statements by themselves are true. However, the statements may be improperly combined to produce an illogical conclusion:
Some animals are dogs,
Lions are animals,
Therefore, lions are dogs.
Philosophy and history cannot and should not be separated into two different debates as Lundahl (2022i) mistakenly believes. They must be part of the same debate. This is why Mr. Lundahl is having so many problems in this debate trying to justify the existence of the Talking Snake of Genesis 3 and many other topics. He doesn’t have the good scientific or historical evidence to support his claims.”
In response to my lions and dogs example, Lundahl (2022r) then explains why this syllogism is indeed illogical:
“The improper combination is technically known as an invalid syllogism. The middle term cannot be twice undistributed in a valid one. Now a term can be distributed in two ways : by being subject in a sentence with "all" or "no" or by being predicate in one with "no" or "not all" for the subject. In the major, it is undistributed because it is in a proposition with "some" and not one with "all" and in the minor, it is undistributed as predicate of a proposition that is affirmative and not negative.”
As I mentioned in Henke (2022ge), I have no problems with his explanation. However, in Lundahl (2022s), Mr. Lundahl needlessly repeats why this syllogism is illogical. Nevertheless, I agree with him that logic is universally valid. However, the evidence indicates that this validity comes from the physical properties of the Universe and not anything supernatural.
References:
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).