Argument from consciousness
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Conservative (talk | contribs) at 22:10, August 13, 2019. It may differ significantly from current revision.
The argument from consciousness is an argument for the existence of God based on the problems consciousness poses for the atheistic worldview. The best-known defender of the argument from consciousness is J.P. Moreland.[1] See: Atheism and consciousness
Professor John Piippo summarizes Moreland's argument from consciousness thusly:
| “ | J.P. is one of the best teachers I have ever encountered. His writing is crisp-clear. He's a brilliant thinker. He understands the relevant issues. Ultimately, this argument succeeds as an example of abductive reasoning:
|
” |
Other explanation of the argument from consciousness:
- Nature consists of a finite number of elements.
- We (our physical bodies) consist of those elements.
- The elements themselves which we consist of, and nature itself, have no consciousness.
- Despite our elements themselves having no consciousness, we do.
- Consciousness can not happen by chance, therefore there must be a being who supply that to us.
- Infinite regress of beings is illogical, therefore a single, uncaused causer must be the causer of consciousness.
- This uncaused causer of the conscience is God
Professor John Piippo on the argument from consciousnes
Objections to the argument from consciousness
- Evolutionists typically argue that consciousness may happen by chance. However, this is highly illogical and unlikely, so is yet another weak argument for atheism (see: Atheism and irrationality).
- Infinite regress is allowable both in modern mathematics and physics.
- The last point (that the uncaused causer is God) is unsupported unless it is taken as a statement of definition. If this is the case, the prior arguments are unnecessary.
See also
External links
- How Consciousness Points to the Existence of God - Cold-Case Christianity with J. Warner Wallace