Argument from consciousness

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Argument from Consciousness is an argument for the existence of God against naturalism.

Contents 1 Philosophical summary of the argument 1.1 Inductive form 1.2 Deductive form 2 Criticism 3 Notes and References

[edit] Philosophical summary of the argument

The argument may be stated in Inductive or Deductive form^[1]

[edit] Inductive form

Given theism and naturalism as live options fixed by our background beliefs, theism provides a better explanation of consciousness than naturalism, and thus receives some confirmation from the existence of consciousness.

[edit] Deductive form

1. Genuinely nonphysical mental states exist.
2. There is an explanation for the existence of mental states.
3. Personal explanation (PE) is different from natural scientific explanation (NSE).
4. The explanation for the existence of mental states is either a PE or a NSE.
5. The explanation is not an NSE.
6. Therefore the explanation is a PE.
7. If the explanation is PE, it is theistic.
8. Therefore, the explanation is theistic.

Theists such as Robert Adams^[2] and Richard Swinburne^[3] have advanced slightly a different version of this argument which focuses on mental/physical correlations and not merely the existence of mental states.

[edit] Criticism

[edit] Notes and References

1. ^ Both these are following J. P Moreland "The Argument from Consciousness" in The Rationality of Theism ed Paul Copan and Paul Moser, London:Routeledge (2003) ISBN 0-415-26332-8
2. ^ see Robert Adams "Flavors, Colors and God" reprinted in Contemporary Perspectives on Religious Epistemology OUP (1992) pp225-40
3. ^ see Richard Swinburne The Existence of God Oxford:Clarendon (1979) Ch 9; The Evolution of the Soul 183-9 etc.