Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Amadeus
You Caught It In Your Quote
Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:20am
104.129.196.79 (XFF: 198.36.89.22)

"If minds are wholly dependent on brains, and brains on biochemistry, and biochemistry (in the long run) on the meaningless flux of the atoms, I cannot understand how the thought of those minds should have any more significance than the sound of the wind in the trees. And this is to me the final test."

Lewis knows that our thoughts have more significance, but cannot (himself) understand how that is possible "if our minds are dependent on...the meaningless flux of the atoms." That is not a logical argument. It is an argument from incredulity.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

Just because you agree with his conclusion does not change that he reaches it via fallacious logic.

Amadeus

  • clearly states: "If minds are wholly dependent on brains, and brains on biochemistry, and biochemistry (in the long run) on the meaningless flux of the atoms, I cannot understand how the thought of... more
    • You Caught It In Your Quote — Amadeus, Tue Jan 10 7:20am
      • Poorly done.shadow, Tue Jan 10 8:45am
        His conclusion follows his 'if' clause. He fully explains why the view he disagrees with is not logically conclusive.
        • No he doesn'tBob the builder, Tue Jan 10 10:41am
          or he wouldn't have put "I cannot understand how" - by saying that he is making clear it is only a personal interpretation. Which it is
Click here to receive daily updates


Religion and Ethics BBS