March 17, 2011

How Identity, Logic and Physics Prove God's Existence


In terms of the meaning of life, the question of identity is a critical one. What is the basis of identity? Is it mainly extrinsic or intrinsic? Are we to understand reality and identity based on appearance alone?  How are logic, truth and identity related? The following is a brief outline of how identity, logic and physics prove God's existence, with a full outline at the end of the article:

How Identity, Logic and Physics Prove God’s Existence:

I. Formal logic presupposes certain truths theoretically exist as a basis for sound reasoning.
II. The foundation of cohesive logic appears to have been undermined by quantum physics.
III. NDE Cases support a cohesive, logical understanding within a theistic framework.
IV. Materialism has failed to provide support for answers to foundational questions while Theism has provided such support.
V, Conclusion: proof is affirmed by logic and material evidence and the preponderance of evidence supports a theistic interpretation of the universe. 

I. Formal logic requires certain elements as a basis for sound reasoning.

Since the foundation of classical philosophy was laid in Aristotle’s time, the principles of formal logic have been developed and refined. From the beginning, it was noted that universal truth and validity must be presupposed in order for formal logic to work. To this day, a formal philosophical proposition, known as a categorical syllogism, must have both true premises and a valid form in order to be considered logically acceptable. It’s possible to have false premises and a valid form and vice versa.[1 ]The following is an example of a syllogism:

Premise 1: A conventional syllogism offers proof using true premises and a valid form.
Premise 2: Certain philosophies deny true premises and valid forms can exist.
Conclusion: Certain philosophies deny that a conventional syllogism offers logical proof.


As the above syllogism shows, the conventions of formal philosophy have certain philosophical implications in and of themselves. Like today, many philosophers in Aristotle's day tried to reject the fact that consistent truth and validity are required as a basis of debate. They were called Sophists. The Sophist Protagoras stated, "Man is the measure of all things." Everything is relative and there are no values because man, individual man, is the measure of all things.“[2] We see this same opinion today widely accepted in society in various forms.

Among intellectual atheists, the laws of logic are about as popular as pork chops at a bar mitsva. Atheist Ayn Rand defined logic mainly as a subjective art: "Logic is the art or skill of non-contradictory identification."[3] Logic, however, consists mainly of objective laws and principles. I offered to debate atheists at the Debunking Christianity blog but the basic answer was "We don't do logic." Instead, they offer what is called an "Outsider Test" in an attempt to disprove God's existence. The fact is, though, their experiment is based upon the primary laws of logic. The law of identity, law of the excluded middle, and the law of non-contradiction all come into play. Any critical thinking depends on the laws of logic, even if people don't realize they are using the laws intuitively. These laws are quite easy to understand. The law of non-contradiction basically says it is not possible that something be both true and not true. The law of identity says A is A and A is not B. In other words, something is what it is and needs at least one identifying characteristic in order to differentiate it from something else.

II. The foundation of cohesive logic appears to have been undermined by quantum physics.

The Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy testifies of how discoveries in quantum mechanics have shaken the basis of our understanding of the physical world including the nature of identity and uniqueness: "Indeed, the transition from classical to quantum physics marks a genuine revolution in our understanding of the physical world."[4] "This should not suggest that the uncertainty principle is the only aspect of the conceptual difference between classical and quantum physics: the implications of quantum mechanics for notions as (non)-locality, entanglement and identity play no less havoc with classical intuitions."[5]

The definition of Materialism according to Webster’s Dictionary states, “Materialism: a theory that physical matter is the only or fundamental reality and that all being and processes and phenomena can be explained as manifestations or results of matter.”[6]

Materialists, however, has so far failed to fulfill this definition as a theory. Precious little “can be explained” regarding the most important metaphysical questions of existence. Why is there something instead of nothing? What's the origin of matter, the universe, the origin of life, the origin of information, the origin and makeup of consciousness? Quantum mechanics has undermined the basis of materialist reasoning and logic as well. Quantum physics offers mainly metaphysical under-determinism and more questions than answers.

As you consider the following essential definition of entanglement, you can understand why QM has created a problem for many philosophers: “Quantum entanglement is a process in which two objects are linked together in such a way that any changes to the properties of one can be measured from the other regardless of the distance between them.”[7] Quantum particles remain mysteriously connected no matter how far away. This phenomenon forms the basis of new quantum Internet technology. Boundaries that were assumed to be finite and localized are not. Because of the implications, many materialist philosophers have felt the need to reject proven science in order to maintain their worldview. Take, for example,  this quote by Ayn Rand objectivist Dean Sandin:

“Quantum Mechanics holds that a particle is nowhere and everywhere throughout some extended region, until magic happens and instantaneously it’s at one place. Of course, QM doesn’t say “magic”. But rationally speaking it means magic, i.e., non-identity in various guises, whether named non-locality, backwards-in-time causality, indeterminacy, the (literal and physical) primacy of consciousness, or whatever.

“To reject QM as physically wrong is fine. It’s necessary. But it is not merely physically wrong. The deeper rot in QM is the admission of non-identity into physical reasoning. Doing physics right doesn’t merely mean getting the right answers from a mathematical formalism – not while the underlying entities can’t be non-contradictorily grasped. It also means eliminating the contradictions that prevent the clear grasp of the physical entities. And that means rediscovering identity, and admitting back into the basis of physics the real entities that QM gives up on.”[8]

Note how the "objectivist" materialist philosopher must "reject" proven science because it opposes his subjective view of reality. Sandin's view is not isolated, but represents objectivists in general, according to objectivism101.com:  "In Objectivists circles, one major application of the Law of Identity is to reject the Copenhagen model of Quantum Physics... These, and other ideas, are based on the idea that the light particles do not exist as anything until they are detected. It exists as both a particle and a wave, and yet neither. It has no specific attributes until the probability wave is collapsed. The point of all of this is that it says that something that exists doesn't exist in a particular way. The Law of Identity rejects this."[9]

Objectivists are moderate relativists who recognize the importance of logic to some degree. Atheists who desire to justify their beliefs logically must somehow come to terms with QM paradoxes and address them. Many atheists simply live in denial pretending there is no conflict. According to the objective scientific method, if your hypothesis does not line up with documented scientific facts, the correct decision is not to preemptively reject science, and not to live in denial, but to consider another hypothesis, another explanation. According to the MIT Technology Review, QM studies by scientists in Poland and around the world are identifying information as the bedrock of reality and this point is in perfect agreement with a theist view of creation: "All this work stems from the growing realization that it is not the laws of physics that determine how information behaves in our Universe, but the other way round."[10]

In Darwin’s day, scientists naively referred to the living cell as a simple cell or a simple  lump.. Now we know living cells are incredibly complex. In a similar manner, the subatomic world, as the apparent foundation of the physical world, is more mysterious than first imagined. Article “Identity and Individuality in Quantum Theory” by Stanford University has outlined present problematic metaphysical issues related to identity and under-determinism.[11]

Scientific American has outlined how the quantum world is not neatly compartmentalized and separated from our visible day-to-day environment, as philosophers and scientists had thought: “The impression that quantum mechanics is limited to the microworld permeates the public understanding of science… Yet this convenient partitioning of the world is a myth. Few modern physicists think that classical physics has equal status with quantum mechanics; it is but a useful approximation of a world that is quantum at all scales… Until the past decade, experimentalists had not confirmed that quantum behavior persists on a macroscopic scale. Today, however, they routinely do."[12] The studies mentioned in Scientific American show there is an overlap of quantum physics and classic physics in both the micro- and macro- worlds, however, quantum logic and classic, Aristotlean logic remain unreconciled for the materialist, especially since the more mysterious quantum physics forms the primary foundation of the physical world. Studies in quantum physics reveal an under-determinism of specific particles in addition to an under-determinism with regard to larger questions of how sets and systems in the physical world interrelate.

III.  NDE Cases support a cohesive, logical understanding within a theistic framework.

If quantum mechanics seems to dismantle a cohesive logical explanation of the universe, it is likely that there is a non-materialist explanation. Consider another possible explanation of identity. Research has shown that many people, including Ernest Hemingway, have had near death experiences wherein they perceived their spirits were leaving their physical bodies. Ernest Hemingway describes his experience during WWI:

"A big Austrian trench mortar bomb, of the type that used to be called ash cans, exploded in the darkness. I died then. I felt my soul or something coming right out of my body, like you'd pull a silk handkerchief out of a pocket by one corner. It flew around and then came back and went in again and I wasn't dead anymore."[13]

The Apostle Paul described a possible out-of body experience in 2 Corinthians 12. 3-4: "And I know how such a man-- whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows- was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak." 

A skeptic may argue that people who tell of visiting heaven and hell are describing mere psychological experiences, but additional research has shown that eyewitness accounts are, in fact, verifiable.  Pamela Reynolds described a NDE account wherein she realized she was observing her own body from an elevated perspective describing images she could not have seen with her taped-shut natural eyes: "The saw thing that I hated the sound of looked like an electric toothbrush and it had a dent in it, a groove at the top where the saw appeared to go into the handle, but it didn't ... And the saw had interchangeable blades, too, but these blades were in what looked like a socket wrench case ...” She also described statement made during her operation while she was under heavy anesthesia with special clicking earplugs in her ears: "Someone said something about my veins and arteries being very small. I believe it was a female voice and that it was Dr. Murray, but I'm not sure. She was the cardiologist [sic]. I remember thinking that I should have told her about that ... I remember the heart-lung machine. I didn't like the respirator ... I remember a lot of tools and instruments that I did not readily recognize.”[14] The account was documented by BBC and is free for viewing on YouTube,.[15] And part 2, where doctors describe more of the precise details, is also on YouTube[16]

Critics have stated the interview with Reynolds took place three years after the operation and is therefore invalid. However, Pam’s recollection of other details that day remained extremely detailed and vivid and a 13 year Dutch study published in the Lancet, a prestigious, peer reviewed journal, stated the following: The scientists were surprised that the NDErs recalled their experience with the same degree of detail when interviewed again several years later.”[17]

The Lancet published information on another case: "In another account, from a prospective Dutch NDE study, a nurse removed the dentures of an unconscious heart attack victim, and was identified after his recovery as the one who removed them. This surprised him, as that patient had been in a deep coma and undergoing cardie-pulmonary resuscitation at the time.”[18]

People who have been born blind who have recorded testimonies in hospitals with detailed, visual accounts of rooms, instruments, equipment and people they could not have seen with their nonworking natural eyes. Kenneth Ring has interviewed over 30 such blind people with NDE testimonies and describes the accounts in his book Mindsight: Near-death and out-of-body Experiences of the Blind.[19] A videotaped interview with Vicki Noratuk, who had been born blind but saw during her NDE, is listed on YouTube. [20] 

IV. Materialism has failed to provide support for answers to foundational questions while theism has provided such support.

Concepts of truth and validity are required as implied tandem universal certainties in order to propose a conventional philosophical argument. But absolute truth is mainly rejected by materialists because either they don't like the implications there is an absolute moral standard, or, because it seems to be an admission of a transcendent reality. They philosophically depend on implied absolute truth as a foundation for making their arguments while at the same time they mainly reject the reality of the foundation and its wider implications. Quantum physics has further highlighted the logical inconsistency of materialism. Materialists mainly use Aristotelian logic in the day-to-day world, while attempting to apply a separate logic for QM phenomena. However, there is no real clear boundary between these worlds, as referenced in the aforementioned Scientific American article.

Materialism has also failed to provide specific answers for and/or evidence regarding the origin of the universe, the origin of matter, the origin of life, the origin of information, the origin and makeup of consciousness. Many materialists had assumed that dualism had been refuted. But NDE cases and evidence have revived this debate.

Theism does provide a logical and cohesive framework and specific answers to the above questions in keeping with documented evidence and critical reasoning. In theism, the basic laws of logic, such as the law of identity, can be used as tool for comprehensively describing the physical and spiritual world because there is a deeper foundation than the quantum world as a basis for reality. This basis of identity is described in scripture. As note previously, The MIT Technology Review summarized how “ it is not the laws of physics that determine how information behaves in our Universe, but the other way round.”  Hebrew 11.3 confirms how Logic, information and the spiritual dimension form the basis of prime reality. John 1.1, 14 shows how God, as the Logos,  is the logical basis of prime reality. Colossians 1.17 shows how God is both the creator and ultimate enabler of the physical world. Also, scientific studies show that practicing unconditional forgiveness offers incredibly health benefits, likened to quitting smoking.[23]. A lifestyle of thanksgiving[24] and a lifestyle of religious worship also offer significantly increased health and happiness[25]. These facts are not logically supported by a materialist paradigm. Materialist theorists claim that both forgiveness and vengeance are natural and good moral actions. If both forgiveness and vengeance are supposedly morally natural, practical and good instincts, then why do they have opposite health effects? These combined facts underscore the truth that the identity of Christ serves as the reference point for the ideal moral life.

Full Outline: How Identity, Logic and Physics Prove God’s Existence:

I.
Formal logic presupposes certain truths theoretically exist as a basis for sound reasoning.
    A. A categorical syllogism, for example, requires the existence of implied universal truth and validity.
        1. At least two laws of logic apply in all possible worlds.
             a. Law of non-contradiction: It is not possible that something be both true and not true.
             b. Law of identity: A = A. Something is what it is and has at least one identifying characteristic.

II. T
he foundation of cohesive logic appears to have been undermined by quantum physics.
    A. A quantum particle has ambiguous identifying characteristics until it is measured and collapsed.
    B. Quantum non-locality and entanglement imply boundaries that were assumed to be finite and localized are not.
    C. QM phenomena and influences are not neatly compartmentalized apart from the Visible day-to-day World
    D. If the physical world is truly interconnected by energy, there is only one implied physical identity.
    E. It is not the laws of physics that determine how information behaves in our Universe, but the other way around.

III. NDE Cases Support a Cohesive, Logical Understanding within a Theistic Framework.
    A. NDE patients describe situations they could not have perceived with their physical senses.
    B. Reynolds described the appearance of a unique instrument used and recalled a specific conversation.
    C. A Dutch NDE patient described aspects of an operation that occurred observed during clinical death with a cardiac arrest.
    D. People born blind have made accurate, detailed descriptions of images they could not have seen with their natural eyes.
    E. A specific identity and locality is maintained while experiencing clinical death, consistent with the law of identity.
    F. NDE accounts imply that human volition (free will) exists and operates on a spiritual level.
    G. NDE accounts imply a God with a loving nature exists. This supports the theist view over other religions.

IV.
Materialism has failed to provide support for answers to foundational questions while theism has provided such support.
    A. Universal and certain truth and validity are implied as a necessary combination in making formal philosophical arguments but the possibility of absolute truth is rejected by most materialists because of the theistic implications.
    B. Studies in quantum physics offer metaphysical under-determinism while cohesive logic regarding identity remains beyond reach.
    F.  Materialism has Failed to provide minimal answers with regard to the origin of the universe, the origin of matter, the origin of life, the origin of information, the origin and makeup of consciousness.
    G. Theism does provide a logical and cohesive framework and specific answers to the above questions in keeping with related evidence.
 
V. Conclusion
     A. Proof is affirmed by logic and material evidence and the preponderance of evidence supports a theistic interpretation.
         1. The materialist view is logically inconsistent and in conflict with science and evidence implying the supernatural.
         2. The Christian view is supported by cohesive logic, science, evidence and scriptural text.
              a. Hebrew 11.3: Logic, information and the spiritual dimension form the basis of prime reality.
              b. John 1.1, 1.14: God is the logical basis of prime reality.
              c. Colossians 1.17: God is both the creator and enabler of the physical world.


References:
[1] Philosophy Pages: Categorical Syllogisms    http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e08a.htm, Fundamentals of Logic, http://web.utk.edu/~nolt/courses/logic.html
[2] The History Guide: Greek Thought: Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, http://www.historyguide.org/ancient/lecture8b.html
[3] Ayn Rand Lexicon: Galt’s Speech, For the New Intellectual, 125., http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/logic.html
[4] Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: The Uncertainty Principle http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-uncertainty/
[5] Ibid.
[6] Webster’s Online Dictionary, Materialism, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/materialism
[7] News.com: Australian Scientists may have Worked out the Mystery of Teleportation, http://www.news.com.au/technology/australian-scientists-may-have-worked-out-the-mystery-of-teleportation/story-e6frfro0-1225739271558#ixzz1GpW3PoWT
[8] Incinerating Presuppositionalism: In Comment posted By Dawson Bethrick October 23, 2010 http://bahnsenburner.blogspot.com/
[9] Objectivism101: Law of Identity http://objectivism101.com/Lectures/Lecture19.shtml
[10] MIT Technology Review: The Foundation of Reality: Information or Quantum Mechanics?
http://technologyreview.asia/blog/arxiv/23541/
[11] Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Identity and Individuality in Quantum Theory, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qt-idind/
[12] Scientific American,  Living in a Quantum World, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=living-in-a-quantum-world
[13] IANDS: 17 Near-Death Experience Accounts from "Beyond the Light"  http://iands.org/nde-stories/17-nde-accounts-from-beyond-the-light.html
[14] Testimony of Pam Reynolds,  http://www.physicspost.com/physicsforums/topic.asp-ARCHIVE=&TOPIC_ID=898.htm
[15] YouTube: BBC: PAM SEES GOD. NDE Pam Reynolds. Amazing! Full version!, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNbdUEqDB-k&feature=related
[16] YouTube: BBC: PAM SEES GOD. NDE Pam Reynolds. Amazing! 2 part, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osfIY4B3y1U&annotation_id=annotation_815715&feature=iv
[17] the Lancet , Dutch NDE Study, http://www.mikepettigrew.com/afterlife/html/dutch_study.html
[18] The Lancet, "Near-Death Experience in Survivors of Cardiac Arrest: A prospective Study in the Netherlands” http://www.lancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2801%2907100-8/abstract
[19] Near Death: People Born Blind Can See During a NDE, http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence03.html
[20] Near Death Experience - Blind woman SEES while OUT OF BODY, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HbtoX3Q5O
[21] New Testament; Romans 1.18-23
[22] Burns, Jennifer; Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right; p2

[23] Templestream, Christmas: The Beauty and Challenge of Forgiveness, http://templestream.blogspot.com/2011/12/first-global-christmas-forgiveness.html
[24] Templestream, The Health and Logic of a Thankful Lifestyle, http://templestream.blogspot.com/2011/11/health-and-logic-of-being-thankful.html
[25] Templestream, Gallup Polls Highlight Happiness, Health and Logic in Spirituality, http://templestream.blogspot.com/2010/12/gallup-polls-highlight-happiness-health.html

Article last revised January 19, 2012

Related:

The Health and Logic of a Thankful Lifestyle
Christmas: The Beauty and Challenge of Forgiveness
Gallup Polls Highlight Happiness, Health and Logic in Spirituality

329 comments:

  1. ACTIONJACKSON864Mar 23, 2011 07:13 AM

    Hey Rick, I enjoy the exchanges between you and Dawson Bethrick...

    I personally know someone who was pronounced dead, and then came back to life. He came back to life inside the body bag.

    He told me that there was nothing...no shiny lights, no pearly gates, no red devil man.

    He believed there was heaven and hell before the incident, and after, he doesnt know what to think. I dont think that you claiming "There is another dimension, a spiritual dimension, which is verifiable in NDE research and testimonies." is at all accurate.


    So what do you think happend to my friend when he died and came back, yet saw no "spiritual dimension"?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Action,

    "I dont think that you claiming "There is another dimension, a spiritual dimension, which is verifiable in NDE research and testimonies." is at all accurate."

    -The NDE research doesn't propose that every person who has a NDE experience sees the same things or must see or experience anything unique at all.

    By saying these experiences are not "accurate" are you implying all NDE should experience something extraordinary in order to be true? I don't believe that.

    I don't believe Ernest Hemingway was lying in his personal account and I don't believe there is any materialist explanation for NDE blind people who offer detailed descriptions of hospital buildings.

    Regards,

    Rick

    ReplyDelete
  3. ActionJackson864Mar 23, 2011 05:36 PM

    "are you implying all NDE should experience something extraordinary in order to be true?"

    from what I understood from your blogpost, you are saying that since people have "seen angels" or "blind people have described hospital buildings" it seemed you were saying that everyone had these experiences...so, if some people see angels and some people see nothing at all after having a near death experience, why do you think this proves that there is a spiritual dimension?

    ReplyDelete
  4. "it seemed you were saying that everyone had these experiences."

    - Sorry that this point has become a stumbling block for you. I didn't mean to imply the meaning you suggest in the article.

    I did post two new links in the article that highlight the documented, transcendental nature of identity. One is an interview with Pamela Reynolds Lowery and another with a blind woman named Vicki Noratuk. These videos may help to clarify why these accounts are not explainable based on the standard materialistic understanding of the mind.

    Regards,

    Rick

    ReplyDelete
  5. When are you going to have a post about how quantum physics proves your belief that the invisible god-man in the sky watched earth spin for 4 1/2 billion years and then said "You know, that little spot there in the Middle East is really starting to intrigue me. The other 99% of the planet, not so much. And those little children of mine who have been struggling to live for the last 200,000 years, again, not so much. But this Moses guy is just really fricken awesome!!

    And then he turned himself into a man in order to get a little more personal with his peeps.(Only in the Middle East, of course. He's only one god, right?)
    And after spending a few years making donkeys talk and impregnating the occasional virgin, he decides that a really great idea would be to allow his very own creation, whose very existence is owed to him, to savagely beat himself to death in the most barbaric,disgusting,revolting,sickening,immoral manner possible.

    All in the name of forgiveness and love.
    Right?

    I'll be waiting for that post.

    Oh, a book you might enjoy-"Why I Believed: Reflections From a Former Missionary" by Ken Daniels. It's available on his website for free.

    Hope this post isn't too verbose but whenever I'm enjoying an interesting discussion on an Atheist blog and one of you Christian nutters feels the need to stick your nose in with your religious nonsense, I just kinda like to respond with a friendly "Hi, everyone on this blog is aware of the ridiculous views of christian fruitcakes and and we don't really need to hear yours because we've heard it all before."

    ReplyDelete
  6. Part 1.

    Hello Kilo Papa,

    You seem to be more interested in unloading bitterness and resentment than getting at the truth. Your post is off-topic, essentially a rant against the Bible. If you want to try to disprove the Bible, I suggest you read this post: "An Open Challenge to Bible Critics"

    http://templestream.blogspot.com/2010/01/open-challenge-to-bible-critics.html

    If you want to discuss why there is pain and suffering in the world, the reason is because people are created with free choice and history shows we don't have a very good track record.

    Love requires free choice. By God's free choice He chose to offer grace and mercy and His own life as a sacrifice for us. That is the highest expression of love. Hollywood's egocentric versions of love seem to pale in comparison.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Part 2

    "Oh, a book you might enjoy-"Why I Believed: Reflections From a Former Missionary" by Ken Daniels. It's available on his website for free."

    I checked out his website and story and how Ken's Christian life was based on one faith crisis after another. It's a good example for the blog "Debunking Christianity" where they believe a person's place of birth determines their beliefs.

    When you look for Ken's underlying argumentation against Christianity, it seems to be based upon personal opinion: "A good God wouldn't be like that." My article above isn't so much based on personal opinions but on science and logic. You failed to address any of the points in my article rationally and logically. You can still point out any factual mistakes in my article if you are able to.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Part 3

    "I just kinda like to respond with a friendly "Hi, everyone on this blog is aware of the ridiculous views of christian fruitcakes and and we don't really need to hear yours because we've heard it all before.""

    - If you've heard it all before should probably have a way of refuting its obvious mistakes, right?

    Actually no, you have not addressed any of the points at all. You offer an appeal to hyperbole and personal insults, which is a typical sign of someone at a loss for answers.

    I would suggest you read a brief history of an intelligent physicist "Why I am a Christian" by Professor Henry Margenau.

    People who agree that science and faith in a higher power are compatible are in agreement with a whole bunch of "fruitcakes" as you described: Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, Schroedinger, Dirac, Wigner and many others.

    http://www.leaderu.com/truth/1truth16.html

    ReplyDelete
  9. 1) Logic exists. Some blog didn't want to deal with presuppositionalism for the umteenth time. They offered an acceptable reason to reject theism, but we'll ignore that because logic exists.
    2) Some Objectivist on a forum post somewhere is wrong about Quantum Mechanics, and the nature of science.
    3) People have brain trauma hallucinations.

    Conclusion:
    GOD!

    That's not coherent, reasonable, or acceptable. Fail.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hello Tatarize,

    >> 1) ...They offered an acceptable reason to reject theism, but we'll ignore that because logic exists.

    - Don't ignore it, whatever it is, please, let's see it.

    >> 2) Some Objectivist on a forum post somewhere is wrong about Quantum Mechanics, and the nature of science.

    - No, not one - according to Objectivism101: "In Objectivists circles, one major application of the Law of Identity is to reject the Copenhagen model of Quantum Physics."

    >> 3) "People have brain trauma hallucinations."

    - No. The events listed describe documented out of body experiences, verified by multiple doctors and first-hand witnesses.

    ------------------

    Here's the deal, Tatarize, moderate relativists, such as objectivists, recognize the need to use logic as a basis of reasoning. But, knowing you a bit, I understand you believe you can say:

    "I believe QM, I believe the law of identity, I believe I have a free will... and there's no problem."

    You are an atheist who seems to be in denial, refusing to acknowledge the logical contradictions of your beliefs. And you don't want to consider the BBC testimonies as valid evidence. To critique these propositions with validity, please use logic and evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  11. D) Your conclusion is fallacious. First you show logic. Then you say well, Objectivist's (but not all atheists) don't agree with quantum mechanics, thus they're relativists (you never conclude that they are wrong about their view of quantum mechanics). Then you bring in your fallacious argument that renders your conclusion fallacious. The argument from ignorance is the most common argument for God. You, first, show something that is very hard to believe (I don't mean that I don't believe it but you need something that'll catch people's attention), yet, instead of trying to do something to show a conclusion, you automatically say that it is God.



    E) Assuming you that your arguments were actually true, your conclusion that the Christianity God is true, is debatable. For instance, in this particular article, you do not argue that the Bible is a reliable source. You do not argue for Christianity, instead, at best, you are arguing for deism. Your arguments, even if they were true, does not prove that the Christian God is real as opposed to Allah, deism, or any other religious god.

    ReplyDelete
  12. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  13. These are just the main criticisms of your essay. There are mini, less important nitpickings that I could argue against (such as you being no different than any other "philosophical sophist"). As a former Christian, I really hope that people do not try to use these fallacious arguments because they simply just will not work and are embarrassing. They do not represent an argument against atheism (simply just against Objectivism). Even then the argument is not very good. You spend two paragraphs on quantum mechanics itself, simply citing a philosophical dictionary (as if all philosophies agree on everything), then the rest of your argument is saying that Objectivists are relativists. You don't bother to rebuttal their argument against quantum mechanics. In fact, you don't bother to even explain why they don't believe it. Then thirdly, you commit the fallacy of arguing from ignorance without showing evidence that it was a deity that helped these blind people. Lastly, the most detrimental, you fail to prove why it is the Christian God that people should believe in. Rather than any other deity from any other religion.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hello Tyler,

    Thanks for your comments but I find fault in your generalizations.

    It is incorrect to say my article and evidence rely solely on the "argument from ignorance."

    For anyone who does not know what this is, here is a published definition: "It asserts that a proposition is necessarily true because it has not been proven false (or vice versa)."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

    Materialists have a much more serious problem than finding supporting truth to "prove" or vindicate "propositions" such as the theoretical origins of matter, life, free will and consciousness - This is what the argument from ignorance implies.

    No, my argument begins with a more presup position. Materialists have a bigger problem in making any kind of proposition whatsoever because there are logical contradictions in their definitions of logic, truth and identity. You can't even make a rational proposition to begin with if you believe logic is either unimportant or contradicts your basic presuppositions about the world.

    Or, Tyler, do you believe it is possible to make a rational proposition without the laws and principles of logic?

    Materialists generally call truth a mere relativistic human convention invented for human happiness but, at the same time, they often recognize the need for absolute principles and laws(intuitively or otherwise)in logic in order to support their propositions.

    >>>...instead of trying to do something to show a conclusion, you automatically say that it is God.

    Wrong again. I underscore the existence of logic and the fixed laws it entails. But my position on logic is not merely theoretical. My worldview, if you want to call it that, is shown to be in harmony with the laws of physics and specific, documented evidence.

    In my conclusion I offer documented and verified NDE experiences. Because science today has a bias - methodological naturalism, atheists offhand call NDE junk science. It is not proposed as science but, nevertheless, it is supporting evidence for a logical worldview.

    The implications of this evidence are in harmony with the laws of logic and the laws of physics. My proposition is more rational philosophically than ones, such as Rand's atheistic objectivism, presented presupposing methodological naturalism.

    ReplyDelete
  15. >>>Lastly, the most detrimental, you fail to prove why it is the Christian God that people should believe in. Rather than any other deity from any other religion.

    - Please re-read the title of the article. What am I actually proposing proof of? The main idea was not to prove the specific theistic God in this one short article. However, I did point out that NDE experiences are largely characterized by accounts of a loving and personal God. This implies Buddhism and other religions may be off.

    If you desire to understand why the Bible and the Christian understanding of God are far superior to evidence for God proposed by other religions, I suggest you read this article:

    An Open Challenge to Bible Critics

    http://templestream.blogspot.com/2010/01/open-challenge-to-bible-critics.html

    Regards,

    Rick

    ReplyDelete
  16. Rick Warden said on incinerating presuupositionalism:"
    I challenge any atheists at this blog to disprove the following argument for God's existence:

    How Identity, Logic and Physics Prove God's Existence

    http://templestream.blogspot.com/2011/03/how-identity-logic-and-physics-prove.html
    "

    Hey Rick, you never came back after your drive-by post over at Dawson's blog, so I figured I'd come to the source. My refutations are in brackets.

    I. Logic is Based on Universal Truth and Validity.

    [This is false. Logic is a process or technique used for connecting concepts and drawing inferences.
    Formal logic, which is the relevant type (there are others, used in computing and mathematics) can be applied
    to entirely unreal propositions and return logically valid results. For instance, this is a logically valid
    syllogism:

    A:Always two there are, a master and an apprentice
    B:Mace Windu killed the apprentice
    therefore
    C: There is now 1 Sith alive, who is a master

    This is logically valid, and correct within the story. If Lucas had arbitrarily added more Sith, the moviegoing public
    would lose some of their willing suspension of disbeleif. Logic can be used without regard to factual content.]

    ReplyDelete
  17. II. Quantum Physics Undermines Materialist Presuppositions
    A. A quantum particle has no identifying characteristic until it is measured and collapsed.
    [This is incorrect. A quantum particle has indeterminate characteristics which can be defined based on probability.
    While we cannot know specific properties of quantum particles, we can know into what bounds those properties will fall
    and what the probability is that they will fall into each state, although we cannot know what the specific state is until
    it is collaped.]
    B. Quantum non-locality and entanglement imply that boundaries that were assumed to be finite and localized are not.
    [This does not appear to be relevant to the discussion. The assumptions of science are continually updated based on new
    data, and this does not conflict in any way with my presuppositions.]
    If the physical world is interconnected by energy, there is only one implied identity or no identity.
    [While these are all English words and the sentence is grammatically correct, it appears to convey no semantic meaning.]
    C. It is not the laws of physics that determine how information behaves in our Universe, but the other way round.
    [Granted. This also does not conflict with my presuppostions, and I am an atheist, making this and A above examples of a
    strawman fallacy.]
    III. Evidence from NDE studies reveal the laws of logic and physics are in fact consistent.
    A. Evidence of this phenomenon is verified by multiple doctors in the case of Pamela Reynolds.
    1. Reynolds accurately described the appearance of a unique instrument used to cut her skull open, that she had never heard described or seen with her physical eyes.
    [The latter portion of this statement is unproven. It is entirely within the scope of current knowlege regarding
    cognition and neural function that she could have seen the device before or after the surgery and edited that sight into
    a different time frame in her memory. Memory of temporal intervals is often poor, and memory inconsitencies are a known
    side effect of surgical anasthesia.]
    2. Reynolds accurately described specific conversations between doctors she could not have heard with her natural ears, according to the actual time-line of events.
    [This is incorrect. Per the timeline of the surgery available to me, the statement she recalled was made prior to her clinical
    death. ]

    ReplyDelete
  18. B. People born blind have made accurate, detailed descriptions of images they could not have seen with their natural eyes.
    [Citation needed]
    C. The specific identity of individuals is maintained after experiencing clinical death, consistent with the law of identity.
    [If this means to say that a person who is revived from a breif state of clinical death retains their memory and personality
    it is unclear to me why it is introduced. Memory shapes personality, and memory is physically recorded in the brain. The clinical death
    stte is short enough that no significant physical damage to the brain ooccurs, then there is no reason why the brain should treat it differently from any other period of unconsciousness.]

    D. NDE accounts confirm that human volition exists on a spiritual level.
    [Not proven. See A above, and the extensive literature mentioned earler in the blog and dismissed due to the supposed counterexample she provides.]
    E. Metaphysically, materialists cannot account for human volition and free will. A closed system of cause, effect and probability cannot conceivably produce free will.
    [Logical fallacy: Appeal to emotion. The fact that you, or indded most people, might consider somthing unpalatabnle does not mean that it is untrue.
    Arguements regarding free will are also essentially meaningless. Either we have free will, or it was predetermined that
    we would feel like we have it, and neither proposition is verifiable. ]

    F. NDE accounts verify a God with a loving nature exists. This supports the theist view over other religions.
    [The first sentence is unsupported. There has still been no proof offered that NDE's occur outside the brain, and therefore
    they are not evidence of a God. The second sentence is also untrue: Kwan Yin, Allah, and Shiva are all described as loving
    gods, and I could name numerous others with a bit of research. At least this line admits that you're trying to prove three separate propositions,
    the first being the existence of a soul/spirit, the second being the existence of one or more divinities, and the third
    that your definition of god matches that divine entity. None of thes are proven here.]

    ReplyDelete
  19. IV. Conclusion
    A. Proof is affirmed by logic and material evidence.
    1. The materialist view is logically inconsistent and in conflict with science and evidence of the supernatural.
    [No evidence of the supernatural has yet been provided, nor have you shown any inconsisencies in my worldveiw.]
    2. The Christian view is supported by cohesive logic, science, evidence and scriptural text.
    [I could provide numerous citations from a variety of supposed holy books saying similar things, but that's more effort than I'm willing to put
    in until I have some confirmation that you're debating in good faith.]

    ReplyDelete
  20. In Dawson's blog you said:"I suppose I will just make it formal. I challenge you...to come and refute my article if you believe you can. "

    I have taken up this challenge, and you have failed to take up your end of it. Therefore, I feel justified in claiming victory, unless you emerge from under your rock to do battle.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Hello Dalai Lama,

    So, the Tibetan word lama corresponds to the Indian word guru. You do have a lot to live up to.

    My comment at Dawson’s blog wasn’t a “drive by” comment. If you had checked before posting here, you’d have noticed my second comment specifically requested Dawson to come to this blog and take up this challenge.

    Part I.
    Your first example uses "entirely unreal propositions" with a correct logical form, a syllogism. However, a sound philosophical proposition requires both a valid form and true proposition. This was already spelled out in the above article with a reference cited: “To this day, a formal philosophical proposition, known as a categorical syllogism, must have both true premises and a valid form in order to be considered logically acceptable.” I’ve added the word “sound” to the premise to underscore this convention. If for some reason you believe I’m making this convention up, read the cited references and the Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Because “true” premises are required for a sound syllogism, this implies that truth does in fact exist and it is not an arbitrary or relative truth. If you want to disprove part 1, you need to disprove the conventions of formal logic.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Part II.

    “although we cannot know what the specific state is until it is collapsed..." –You didn’t refute my point but simply clarified it, thank you….

    Quantum non-locality and entanglement imply that boundaries that were assumed to be finite and localized are not. [This does not appear to be relevant to the discussion.]

    Actually, it’s highly relevant. This is the main reason Dean Sandin felt the need to reject QM, as quoted. When physical objects have no boundaries or location, from a conceptual standpoint, objectivists like Sandin believe the law of identity is broken. The spiritual identity, however, can be localized in spite of QM.

    If you want to disprove the premise of Part II, you need to somehow show that non-locality and entanglement do not challenge classic Aristotlian logic and the law of identity. You haven't done that.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Part III.

    Reynolds accurately described specific conversations between doctors she could not have heard with her natural ears, according to the actual time-line of events.
    >>>[This is incorrect. Per the timeline of the surgery available to me, the statement she recalled was made prior to her clinical
    death. ]

    Can you cite the time-line you used? Check this link for a documented time-line: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pam_Reynolds_%28singer%29
    According to my cited time-line, clinical death ensued when the doctors began cutting into Pam’s skull. In the videos referenced in my article, the doctors state the patient had never seen the device used to cut her skull. Her eyes were taped shut, yet she later described it perfectly, according to the doctors. The following occurred after she was diagnosed as clinically dead: “Reynolds hears a female voice saying that her veins and arteries are very small.”

    NDE accounts confirm that human volition exists on a spiritual level.
    >>Not proven

    In the case of Reynolds, she saw and heard specific items and events not possible with her human senses. This is valid evidence based on the testimonies of professional doctors in the video clips cited. She explained that her perception of these events was under the control of her will. For example, she resisted entering her body at the end of her NDE because she knew she would be in great pain.

    Metaphysically, materialists cannot account for human volition and free will. A closed system of cause, effect and probability cannot conceivably produce free will.
    >>Logical fallacy: Appeal to emotion. - I did not mention any emotion here, simply objective facts.

    NDE accounts verify a God with a loving nature exists. This supports the theist view over other religions.
    >>The first sentence is unsupported. There has still been no proof offered that NDE's occur outside the brain, and therefore they are not evidence of a God.

    No, Dalai, I cited references to video clips of doctors testifying that NDE did in fact occur under a controlled and highly monitored environment.

    If you want to disprove part III you need to show why you believe the testimonies of professional doctors are not credible.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Conclusion

    >>In Dawson's blog you said:"I suppose I will just make it formal. I challenge you...to come and refute my article if you believe you can. " I have taken up this challenge I have taken up this challenge, and you have failed to take up your end of it. Therefore, I feel justified in claiming victory, unless you emerge from under your rock to do battle.

    - Thank you, Dalai, for affirming that my challenge was to Dawson. You are not Dawson. And I don’t recall “my end “ of this challenge was to answer a response within 24 hours. Can you point this out to me? You have helped to clarify some of the points in the argument but have failed to make a dent in the basic premise and conclusion.

    As a self-appointed surrogate for Dawson, I hope he is satisfied with your attempt. I don’t believe he would have fared much better, had he the wherewithal to come and take up the challenge personally. He prefers to write his own articles as a response to other articles. That helps to put him in a good light. But hiding behind one’s own articles and never venturing beyond the borders of one's own blog is a sign of great philosophical weakness.

    Regards,

    Rick

    ReplyDelete
  25. Quantum Mechanics is the new Woo buzzword that can be used to tie 2 unconnected concepts together with wishful thinking. Ten years ago it a nebulous concept of "energy", ten years before that it would have been "vibration"

    ReplyDelete
  26. Reginald SelkirkJul 19, 2011 09:19 AM

    According to my cited time-line, clinical death ensued when the doctors began cutting into Pam’s skull.

    That is not correct. According to the timeline at Wikipedia, opening the skull happened sometime after 8:40.

    Cardiac arrest would be ~ 11:05, when her core temp had cooled, the ECG indicates malfunction, and she was given a dose of KCl. Cessation of brain activity, as monitored by brain stem activity, is reported compete by 11:20. I'm not sure which you would want to count as "clinical death," but it was most certainly not at 8:40.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Reginald SelkirkJul 19, 2011 09:28 AM

    And you don't want to consider the BBC testimonies as valid evidence.

    I do too. The BBC account was a warm and fuzzy account, with reenactments and visual effects, to convey a believer's story. They did not distinguish, for example, details of the timeline which reveal that the alleged veridical events happened before the induction of clinical death. They just glossed over that entirely. It is not detailed, and it does not raise, let alone refute,