My answer to Keith Parsons

Discuss arguments for existence of God and faith in general. Any aspect of any orientation toward religion/spirituality, as long as it is based upon a positive open to other people attitude.

Moderator: Metacrock

Post Reply
User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 10016
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

My answer to Keith Parsons

Post by Metacrock » Mon May 07, 2018 4:20 am

Dr. Parsons philosophy professor from U. Houston clearlake attacks the irreduceability of mind to brain.I answer him in two parts, part 2 on hard problem. That;s wednesay

read,comment on blog and discuss here

http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2018/05/m ... ction.html
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

JBSptfn
Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: My answer to Keith Parsons

Post by JBSptfn » Thu May 10, 2018 4:43 pm

I like the part about the bait and switch. Atheists do that a lot.

Also, I was looking at Parsons' article on Patheos. He talked about a debate between Habernas and Michael Shermer, and claimed that Habernas's debate skills couldn't transform the "weak" evidence for NDE's (as he sees it).

Then, he mentioned something that Daniel Dennett said:
Now, some philosophers, such as Daniel Dennett, dismiss Nagel’s argument as an “intuition pump” masquerading as an a priori argument. An intuition pump is just a clever rhetorical device for stimulating our intuitive propensities (Leibniz’s imaginary walk through a brain the size of a factory was another). They have rhetorical bark, but no real logical bite, Dennett holds. Naturalist philosophers tend to regard intuitions with considerable skepticism, seeing them as epistemological sirens that have an irresistible song if we listen to them, but only lure us to wreck on the reefs of ignorance.
I'm not sure that Dennett and Shermer are the most qualified people. Dennett wrote a stupid book, and Shermer is a hard-core materialist with an axe to grind.

And, in closing, I believe that one reason that this brain chemistry BS gets pushed is because of the psychiatric industry (to peddle their dangerous drugs). In this article, though, they say that the chemical imbalance in the brain theory (for mental disorders) is fake:

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2018 ... eat-fraud/

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts: 10016
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Re: My answer to Keith Parsons

Post by Metacrock » Sun May 13, 2018 4:09 pm

JBSptfn wrote:
Thu May 10, 2018 4:43 pm
I like the part about the bait and switch. Atheists do that a lot.

Also, I was looking at Parsons' article on Patheos. He talked about a debate between Habernas and Michael Shermer, and claimed that Habernas's debate skills couldn't transform the "weak" evidence for NDE's (as he sees it).
yes I know
Then, he mentioned something that Daniel Dennett said:
Now, some philosophers, such as Daniel Dennett, dismiss Nagel’s argument as an “intuition pump” masquerading as an a priori argument. An intuition pump is just a clever rhetorical device for stimulating our intuitive propensities (Leibniz’s imaginary walk through a brain the size of a factory was another). They have rhetorical bark, but no real logical bite, Dennett holds. Naturalist philosophers tend to regard intuitions with considerable skepticism, seeing them as epistemological sirens that have an irresistible song if we listen to them, but only lure us to wreck on the reefs of ignorance.
I'm not sure that Dennett and Shermer are the most qualified people. Dennett wrote a stupid book, and Shermer is a hard-core materialist with an axe to grind.

Denneett is qualified but he;s ideological
And, in closing, I believe that one reason that this brain chemistry BS gets pushed is because of the psychiatric industry (to peddle their dangerous drugs). In this article, though, they say that the chemical imbalance in the brain theory (for mental disorders) is fake:

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2018 ... eat-fraud/
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

Post Reply