Alvin Plantinga and the Mind-Body Problem

Interactionist Substance Dualism: God can do it, and so can you!

Q.E.D.

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

NOTE: I am a materialist. I posted this video to illustrate what I thought was an interesting "solution" to the mind-body problem.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Alvin Plantinga
• Mind-Body Problem
• Descartes
• Materialism
• Substance Dualism
• Christianity
• Causality
• Epiphenomenalism

[leviksu]

Lenny:

/watch?v=niNFHNw1aQU

[LennyBound]

@leviksu If naturalism is true, then all of cognition is part of the natural world (including the processes of decision making, theory selection, and providing reasons). Consequently, any justification one could provide as a basis for accepting naturalism would itself also be naturalistic. I see no contradiction in this view.

What Dr. Bahnsen seems to be asking for is a supernatural "reason" beyond the various naturalistic reasons for accepting naturalism, which is (obviously) not possible.

[leviksu]

@LennyBound you're simply assuming your own conclusion.

[LennyBound]

@leviksu I'm not assuming anything, nor have I even affirmed a position.

Dr. Bahnsen claims that providing reasons for belief in a naturalistic ontology is impossible. I think this is mistaken, and suspect that it stems from a misunderstanding of what naturalism entails concerning "reasons."

Simply put, one can provide reasons for both supernaturalism and naturalism. I see no inherent contradiction in providing reasons for either position.

[Drakbane]

@LennyBound: You're begging the question in this case.

[gextvedde]

@A3A3adamsan I really is a wonder that a professor of philosophy can come up with this sort of tripe. We have the same in the UK with a chap called Richard Swinburne who is a Christian professor at Oxford. The whole argument seems to be "assume a non material God & all the difficulties go away". Adding more unsubstantiated beliefs to other unsubstantiated beliefs does not constitute an argument.

[A3A3adamsan]

This was a big excercise in begging the question.

He presupposes, that christianity is true, and then argues, that mind and body are separate.

Give me a break!

He quotes from the Bible, and calls it "data", he calls belief in God knowledge! *facepalm*

Is this shallow thinking really the best modern theology can offer?

[1GodOnlyOne]

@Purushadasa Excellent analysis. God bless you, Brother!

[1GodOnlyOne]

@LennyBound Do you refer to valid reasons, or just naked "reasons," without reference to the validity or invalidity of those reasons? A child may have a "reason" to run into traffic, but whether that reason is a valid one in the context of the importance of protecting life and limb is questionable.

Aren't naturalism and supernaturalism mutually exclusive?

[RomansPwnedJesus]

God can do it, therefore this objection poses no problem ... Except for begging the question of God existing, the exact position materialists are arguing against.

[pablo4115]

What Jesus said on the cross is a matter of controversy regarding whether he meant that the thief would this day be with him in paradise. Plantinga's quotation is very selective. The reference to today in Luke 23:43 is ambiguous between Christ emphasizing his speaking at that very moment and his meeting the thief on that day in heaven. It's geeky stuff but Plantinga can't get this one for free. He needs to justify his translation.

[defgill]

ummmmmm, i don't, huhhh..... what???

[Purushadasa]

These are pretty simple and basic concepts, but Dr. Plantinga's brilliance manifests in his ability to explain them in a way that's easy to understand, and also irrefutable. You gotta love this guy!

[v01741r31]

I love this guy... he's just likable for some reason.