Sunday, December 14, 2008

New Scientist Article Called Creationists Declare War On The Brain

The Whole article is one bad piece. Why? Well first anyone who disagrees with the mainsteam science view that mind is produce by the brain are classified as creationists. Also it also puts intelligent design in the same way of thinking as creationism. But creationism is different then intelligent design. How? Well creationism relies on a bible as it's evidence. Where intelligent design relies on two facts that no scientist's denies.

1] Biological animals are intelligent
2] Their is design in evolution

Now biologists say they admit both of those things. But it's like biologists who are devoted to naturalism appear not very happy that those two things are facts. Also it's true that a lot of christians have used intelligent design to get their case across. I personally don't like that christians have hijacked intelligent design.

Here's what Patricia Churchland says in the article

Patricia Churchland, a philosopher of neuroscience at the University of California, San Diego, "it is an argument from ignorance. The fact something isn't currently explained doesn't mean it will never be explained or that we need to completely change not only our neuroscience but our physics."

But that's not what dualists are saying. Postulating that mind is seperate from the brain, that the brain is a filter of consciousness is an alternative that should be taken seriously.

Here's another piece from the article.

Schwartz and others argue that since the mind can change the brain, the mind must be something other than the brain, something non-material. In fact, these experiments are entirely consistent with mainstream neurology - the material brain is changing the material brain.

Consistent?. True it's consistent if you preconceive that the brain is doing the changing itself without a soul.

The deathblow to materialism is the fact that we have an inner life. How do emergent systems give rise to an inner life?. Of course they don't. Also their's another way out for materialism by positioning epiphenomenalism. The big problem with this is we know we have conscious experiences but it says consciousness is an illusion.

2 comments:

bob said...

But creationism is different then intelligent design.

You're not too good at spelling.

"But creationism is different than intelligent design."

Bullshit. Creationism invokes a magic god fairy. Intelligent design invokes a magic designer fairy.

What's the fucking difference you lying asshole?

1] Biological animals are intelligent
2] Their is design in evolution

Now biologists say they admit both of those things.

"Biological animals are intelligent"

Biologists don't say that about creationists.

"Their is design in evolution"

Your spelling sucks.

"There is design in evolution."

Bullshit. When creationists talk about design, they really mean "magically create". Biologists don't believe in magic.

Leo MacDonald said...

Intelligent design proponents say this designer could be a number of things even natural. "Creationists say it must be a supernatural god".