Difference between revisions of "Atheism and reason"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 9: Line 9:
 
</ref>]]
 
</ref>]]
  
−
'''Atheism/naturalism and reason''' are incompatible, therefore believing in [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalism]] is self-defeating.<ref>
+
'''Atheism/naturalism and reason''' are incompatible.<ref>
 
*[http://creationevolutiondesign.blogspot.com/2006/09/cs-lewis-argument-from-reason.html C.S. Lewis' argument from reason]
 
*[http://creationevolutiondesign.blogspot.com/2006/09/cs-lewis-argument-from-reason.html C.S. Lewis' argument from reason]
 
*[http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/11/cs_lewis_and_th079541.html C.S. Lewis and the Argument from Reason] by Jay W. Richards, November 25, 2013  
 
*[http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/11/cs_lewis_and_th079541.html C.S. Lewis and the Argument from Reason] by Jay W. Richards, November 25, 2013  
Line 16: Line 16:
 
*[http://truthbomb.blogspot.com/2012/04/cs-lewis-on-rationality-and-materialism.html C.S. Lewis on Rationality and Materialism ]
 
*[http://truthbomb.blogspot.com/2012/04/cs-lewis-on-rationality-and-materialism.html C.S. Lewis on Rationality and Materialism ]
 
*[http://str.typepad.com/weblog/2008/08/naturalisms-hot.html Naturalism's Hot Water]
 
*[http://str.typepad.com/weblog/2008/08/naturalisms-hot.html Naturalism's Hot Water]
−
</ref> In short, if naturalism is true, then we ought not to trust our capacity for reason for the human brain would be a byproduct of blind/unintelligent natural forces.
+
</ref> Therefore, believing in [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalism]] is self-defeating. In short, if naturalism is true, then we ought not to trust our capacity for reason for the human brain would be a byproduct of blind/unintelligent natural forces.
 
<ref>
 
<ref>
 
*[http://creationevolutiondesign.blogspot.com/2006/09/cs-lewis-argument-from-reason.html C.S. Lewis' argument from reason]
 
*[http://creationevolutiondesign.blogspot.com/2006/09/cs-lewis-argument-from-reason.html C.S. Lewis' argument from reason]

Revision as of 21:07, May 28, 2015

If naturalism is true, then we ought not to trust our capacity for reason for the human brain would be a byproduct of blind/unintelligent natural forces. [1]

Atheism/naturalism and reason are incompatible.[2] Therefore, believing in naturalism is self-defeating. In short, if naturalism is true, then we ought not to trust our capacity for reason for the human brain would be a byproduct of blind/unintelligent natural forces. [3]

C.S. Lewis's argument for reason and for the irrationality of materialism

Atheist worldview cannot explain consciousness

The atheist worldview cannot explain the existence of consciousness either and the theistic worldview can offer a reasonable explanation.[4]

Advocates of mind uploading (Mind uploading is the notion that someday mankind may be able to scan and upload their minds to computer storage mediums) are generally strong advocates of cryonics as well.[5] Mind uploading is not a feasible hypothesis.[6] See also: Atheism and cryonics

Existence of consciousness

Mind uploading: Wishful atheist thinking

Mind uploading is the notion that someday mankind may be able to scan and upload their minds to mechanical storage mediums. Mind loading is not feasible. According to the Oxford University philosopher Nick Bostrum, the notion that one can upload one's mind into into mechanical storage mediums has its roots in atheistic/secular humanism and evolutionary ideologies.[7] The atheist, evolutionist and eugenicist Julian Huxley coined the term transhumanism.[8] See: Atheism and transhumanism

Information on the unfeasibility of mind uploading:

See also

References

  1. ↑
  2. ↑
  3. ↑
  4. ↑ The Argument from Consciousness for the Existence of God by John Piippo, 3/20/2012
  5. ↑ Mind uploading - Thought experiments as knowledge
  6. ↑
  7. ↑ A HISTORY OF TRANSHUMANIST THOUGHT, Nick Bostrom, Faculty of Philosophy, Oxford University
  8. ↑ A HISTORY OF TRANSHUMANIST THOUGHT, Nick Bostrom, Faculty of Philosophy, Oxford University