An interesting point. If this is true, must it necessarily follow that consciousness reduces to physical laws? or does it mean that nature cannot reduce to physical laws? (Note: I don't believe that Penrose is a reductionist though he may well be some sort of physicalist.)
Many hard-core materialists believe by simply categorizing all difficult-to-reduce phenomena as epiphenomena they have made "a proper place for it." But I think this is definitional gerrymandering.
Tuesday, June 20, 2017
Wednesday, June 14, 2017
Reductio ad 'undesirum'
One might say this is a conundrum of the design inference: Assuming for the moment that the biological world can be attributed to intentional design, is the most reasonable next inference--even if it can't be inferred scientifically but only on philosophical/religious grounds--that the designing intelligence is that which also caused and infused order into this universe?
A related concern (for some people) is this: If that is the most reasonable inference after the design inference, should that consequence invalidate the design inference?
Modified from its original form |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)