Theism and Explanation

Post Reply New Topic

For some people it seems like Harry Potter, real magick, and talking dragons would be what we'd need to prove that there's a god, to me that doesn't even make sense, you could have any of that or none with or without a god. Seems fair enough to say that certain gods could be dismissed by comparing historical theology to what's here but, that's it.

Dyslexic?

Please explain. I am honestly looking for possibilities here. I already believe/suspect there is "something beyond" the physical world as we know it, and I am interested in hearing what other people think about that either with or without including any specific thought of any "God".

I agree with you there's something very very weird going on out there beyond the limits of our understanding.

It is true that we know very little about how the brain works, and what we commonly believe now may be completely wrong (I would even say, philosophically, experience is just an illusion).

However, 'something beyond the physical world' is just nonsense (especially considering how those something interacts with the physical world). The occurrence of 'weird events', with no systematic study, is not a basis of such extraordinary claim.

I did not see the clip but I read some transcripts. Fact is
1) The patient did not have his eyes covered all the time, and may have seen the doctor before or after the surgery
2) We never knows what he really experienced. We only knows what he says, long after the supposed event happened and filtered by his normal mind.

Says who?


Your statement makes no sense: What "extraordinary claim" do you allege is being made? As written, you have just said, "The occurrence of 'weird events', with no systematic study, is not a basis of [claim for the occurrence of 'weird events'].


The patient did have his eyes covered during the time the doctor made the unique and unusual arm movements reported later.


Yes, and that is why I am asking! In contrast, you are essentially saying the report is bogus because you have no explanation for it ... and that makes no sense.

Well, in theory you could have something, many things, beyond the physical world as we know it. One possible but perhaps weird way of looking at it, JK Rawling wrote the Harry Potter series. If the stories represented a real world to Harry Potter et al., JK is well outside the confines of the world she created, and yes - Harry's past present and future, as well as for all citizens/inhabitants of that world enjoy the same situation that we technically do, ie. no free will.

Heck, the day we're able to do something Tron-like and create AI's living in their own world we'll have replicated a phenomena where they may very well be sealed in a bottle of sorts where they simply wouldn't have the tools to be aware that they're really just 0's and 1's in a machine.

I guess that's part of why, even though I'm a full 100% determinist, I'm also very much an agnostic as I realize that conscious forces could have coded our environment, unconscious forces - in a space of forever in terms of space time, likely couldn't not generate this situation, but then again given enough infinity anything can happen, perhaps even Yahweh.

The question I guess I get stuck with on this one - how would we define physical. If we want to get really draconian, something like electricity is hypothetical rather than real as its not necessarily physical but rather a current of domino reactions. That's not to say we haven't documented the heck out of its behavior to be reasonably sure of ourselves that a properly built lightbulb will in fact light given its due wattage, just that - politics aside - I'm at the point where I won't guess or try to determine what's out there and what isn't and possibly the many things where, like electricity, it took a little bit of work to demystify it.

That is at least rational. In the "presence of thought" experience of my own, I know something physical certainly did have to take place within my brain in order for the experience to have been noted at all, but there is simply no physical explanation as to the cause of/for that otherwise-physical experience. I do attribute that particular experience to "something supernatural" and with a "God connection" of some kind at least because I cannot think of anything or anyone else that would even want/deserve the "credit", but then I see the during-surgery experience of the man "observing the doctor" (and even seeing through the table to notice the doctor's shoes) as evidence only of something "not natural (non-physical)" or whatever and without any presumed or implied connection to "God" ...

... and then looking at all of this from yet another angle ...

Human beings cannot actually create anything. Therefore, even the wildest of our imaginations and/or our fantasies can only be possible because something non-physical exists somewhere. For example: Santa Claus and The Tooth Fairly are certainly not real, yet even our superstitions could not exist if there were no non-physical "elements" of any kind anywhere for our brains/minds to then physically ponder and/or to even manipulate.

You made the extraordinary claim that 'there is something beyond the physical world', but even you admitted that
a) you don't know what those 'something beyond the physical world' are
b) you cannot explain WHY the man had those 'experience' with 'something beyond the physical world'
c) you cannot explain WHY we DO NOT see the effect elsewhere
Therefore what you claim is nonsense regardless whether you think my explanation is sufficient or not.



He said that he saw his eyes being covered.

Last edited by 01001011 on 18 Apr 2011, 10:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

Good question that worth another thread. However, at least we should expect whatever new theory to reduce to the old familiar laws of physics in 'ordinary' situations.

Are you sure you are actually quoting such a flat statement from me?


Why do you there say "are" rather than "is"? I doubt I have ever spoken of that in a plural sense.


Correct, so I am asking questions.


I do not recall anyone having even asked.


I have made no claim at all.


I do not recall that, but that would not affect anything about what he claims to have "seen" after they had been.

Flat out contradictions...

I think not. There are reports of things happening that cannot be explained by physical science, and I am simply asking about such things ... and I do so without presuming to impose any pre-conceived conclusions. People, I believe, should be permitted to think for themselves.

to understand the world you NEED preconceived notions. For example you have to assume it exists independent of your fond wishes and it is what it is, not what you want it to be.

ruveyn

I spoke of not presuming to impose any pre-conceived conclusions, not of having no notions.