Joshua Rasmussen

It's coming...

@DZRishmawy I'm unaware of *anyone* who asserts physicalism due to dogmatic necessity. I'm curious who you might have in mind. What's the name of one example?

Ironically, Physicalism about the mind is one of the most common brute assertions that cannot be sustained upon inquiry but persists largely due to dogmatic necessity on the part of atheists.

@NZJennings A nice story. But is it even possible?

@worldviewdesign ... accumulated through a specified physical process over vast timescales.

The puzzle of consciousness: worldviewdesign.substack.com/p/why-does-con…

@NZJennings A billion dollars in my bank account would be useful, but it doesn't exist.

@worldviewdesign ... complexity. No foundational mystery. The question of why it exists anywhere has a straightforward answer: it was useful.

@Rome2147 Soon... June, I hope.

@worldviewdesign Josh, when can we expect to see early draft’s of Perfect Existence?

@TGrogan268173 "Are you a greater philosopher than Hegel?" Probably.

But all you have is intuitions and unproven first principles with no empirical evidence. Here is another "great philosopher" making a "logical argument". Are you a greater philosopher than Hegel? In his 1801 dissertation De Orbitis Planetarum, Hegel argued that: The Solar System contained five classical planets (Mercury → Saturn). The region between Mars and Jupiter must be empty — a “logical gap” in the planetary sequence.

Your mind couldn't have emerged. I can show you why. Next chapter is ready! A golden key. A locked room. And a new argument that consciousness could not have emerged from mindless matter... worldviewdesign.substack.com/p/the-magic-of…

@TGrogan268173 So do big names in atheism. Where do we go from here?

Big names in the "make-believer" Christian tradition hate science, reason and curiosity.

I would put it this way: the badness of suffering is intrinsic to how it feels. The feeling itself also has value because it provides information that can protect you from greater suffering. Sadness reveals to you that there is something you want that you believe you cannot have. Fear reveals to you that you are perceiving a threat to something you value. Anger reveals to you that you are resisting something that you perceive to be a threat to what you value. In general, all suffering is intrinsically a feeling -- a state of consciousness. You don't need to posit something external to the suffering (god, rules, reasons) for suffering to be what it is or to reveal the information it reveals.

Yesterday I asked for the strongest arguments in favor of the claim "there is no God." A lot of responses had to do with suffering. Atheists, help me understand why suffering is an argument against God. One thing I don't understand in particular is this: if there is no God, just a materialist universe, then how do you contextualize suffering? What is it? Is it still bad? Please help me understand this.

@TGrogan268173 I address that objection: why trust reason? Well, smart scientists have come to wrong conclusions, and reason is utilized in science. So it's not a science vs. reason issue. It's about *working together*, with all the tools, carefully and humble -- and loving each other. 😉

@worldviewdesign Smart people using "evolved intuitions" come to very wrong conclusions that is why science is so great.

@null00333 Good analogy.

@worldviewdesign Unfortunately, skeptics have made it a mission to try to prove what is common sense. We all know 0+0≠1 and that the principle of proportionate causality is true deep down. We won’t get a bag of peanuts from a bag of screws, otherwise science would be impossible.

@Derekjgreat Where did I say that?

@worldviewdesign You say that feeling sad cannot be happening in the brain. Why would you think that?

@HeKS44364823 @GarveBrahman I think it is possible to be certain, but I'm just saying that doesn't follow merely from LNC's necessity.

@worldviewdesign @GarveBrahman Not sure I'm following. Are you saying there are no statements that can be made with certainty? Or maybe that it is not certain that any statements can be made with certainty? What about, "Error is possible". It seems impossible to deny w/out affirming it.

This means certain statements can be affirmed with certainty. Example: no effect precedes a cause. Is this true @worldviewdesign?

@GarveBrahman impossible.

@worldviewdesign Right on. When I said “this means” I didn’t mean in the sense “this logically follows” but more like “this pretty much gives me a pretty solid reason to believe.” Do you believe that it is possible or impossible for an effect to come before a cause?

@booktogr1phy I don't know if there's any reason *you* should posit that. ;)

@booktogr1phy I don't think there's any good reason to think (or evidence) that consciousness depends on any brains rather than the other way. Or at least, mind-brain dendence is based on probablistic inferences, themselves only knowable by "vibes" as you put it (or reason).

@DiegoNicucs True. I agree. Indeed, that the phenomenal content can differ from its physical cause is another implication of dualism.

@worldviewdesign if the contents of direct awareness can differ from their causes (as in the gray squares), then when you say 'thoughts are not brain states by direct awareness,' it is possible that this content also differs from its cause

how to know FOR SURE your thoughts are not the same as brain states: youtube.com/watch?v=SfB3Nl…