Pages 247 to 250: Mr. Strobel is referring to old comments. Examples: Wilder Penfield, neurosurgeon – 1975. He died more than 30 years ago.
Charles Sherrington – 1952
John Eccles – 1977
Much has happened Neuroscience since then!
Page 251: “Meanwhile, the scientists who are committed to finding a purely physical answer — appropriately called “physicalists” – are candid in admitting that they currently have no explanation for how the brain might spawn consciousness.”
Mr. Strobel is wrong here.
First essentially all neuroscientists are committed to finding a purely physical answer.
Second, a number of neuroscientists have explanations for consciousness and mind, although much research has to be done before any of the explanations are confirmed.
Example: V. S. Ramachandran.
Antonio Damasio.
– Check these names in Google to find more info.
It is interesting about the brain, about emotions and free will:
(1) It has been found that your conscious mind feels an emotion 0.52 seconds after your body begins to register that emotion. In other words the unconscious brain already knows you are going to be angry, for instance, 0.52 seconds before you are conscious of being angry.
(2) When you “will” something to happen, such as wiggling your finger, your brain is activated to do that about 0.50 seconds before your conscious mind wills it. The wiggling of the finger coincides roughly in time with your conscious mind realizing it is being willed. In other words the free will your conscious mind believes it has is really something that is in the unconscious. The unconscious has it figured out before you (conscious part) do!
Instead of talking about a conscious free will, maybe we would be more realistic if we talked about an unconscious free will.
Also some neuroscientists call it Free Won’t — See addendum below.
The following is from the special issue of the Scientific American “Mind” on sale until July, 2005 in an article called “Natural Born Liars” by David Livingston Smith:
“Consciousness plays less important role in cognition than previously expected. The thinking part of the brain is somewhat distinct from the system that produces conscious experiences — it’s like the processor and the monitor in a computer system — the work takes place in the processor and monitor does nothing but display information the processor transfers to it. By the same token, the brain’s cognitive systems do the thinking, whereas consciousness displays the information that it receives. This general picture is supported by a great deal of experimental evidence. In one experiment it was found that our brains begin to prepare for action over a third of a second before we consciously decide to act. In other words, despite appearances, it is not the conscious mind that decides to perform an action: the decision is made unconsciously. Although our consciousness likes to take the credit (so to speak), it is merely informed of unconscious decisions after the fact. We are systematically deluded about the role that consciousness plays in our lives.”
(3) More. See religious experiences link below
Page 252: Mr. Moreland, the person being interviewed is not a neuroscientist.
Page 257: The inner and private parts of the brain can be studied with the newer scanning instruments such as MRI.
Any private and not so private religious experiences can be studied successfully. Click.
A “nothing experience can be very intense”.
Page 260: “A person can’t be divided into pieces. You are either a person or you are not – your brain and body can be divided. Therefore I can’t be the same thing as my body.”
Wrong starting premise.
‘In an accident my personality and consciousness may change but I’d be the same person — so consciousness cannot be the same’
You may be the same person but you are a changed person.
Page 162: Do animals have a soul?
“What about animals – do they have souls or consciousness?” … “Absolutely,” came his quick answer, “In several places the Bible uses the word ‘soul’ or ‘spirit’ when discussing animals. Animals are not simply machines. They have consciousness and points of view. But the animal soul is much simpler than the human soul. …And while the human soul survives the death of the body, I don’t think the animal soul outlives its body. I could be wrong, but I think the animal soul ceases to exist at death.”
If souls are a reality then according to the Bible whatever happens to people happens to animals, so if Mr. Moreland doesn’t know for sure that animal will survive their bodily death then the Bible states it plainly that ‘man hath no preeminence above a beast’. Actually these verses suggest that the nothing survives after death, so even for people the soul does not survive – mind dies when the brain dies.
Ecclesiastes 3:19 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity
Ecclesiastes 3:20 All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.
Ecclesiastes 9:5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.
Page 265: “If a finite mind can emerge when matter reaches a certain level of complexity, why couldn’t a far greater mind – God – emerge when millions of brain states reach a greater level of consciousness? … How can they know that a very large God hasn’t emerged from matter, because after all, haven’t a lot of people had religious experiences with God?”
Scientists do not deny this possibility. Mr. Moreland is talking about a natural God, not a supernatural God.
Page 265: ‘Mind a byproduct of of Brain’ “Thus, they’re locked into determinism.”
Laws of Physics and Chemistry are not totally determined — Quantum Physics says so — matter and energy are spooky to a point.
Page 265: “If mind emerged from matter without the direction of a superior intelligence, why should we trust anything from the mind as being rational or true, especially in the area of theoretical thinking?”
– I assume Mr. Moreland means a supernatural God by ‘superior intelligence’.
– How do we know to trust this superior intelligence?
– Actually evolution has a more reasonable explanation for a human mind being rational and also ethical. Evolution has made us rational and generally ethical by the process of natural selection over millions of years of primate evolution.
Page 265: “… because theoretical thinking does not contribute to survival value.”
Mr. Moreland is wrong here. Theoretical thinking is of great survival value. We do this kind of thinking all the time, every day.
– Other primates as well.
Page 266: “If my mind were just a function of the brain, there would be no unified self.”
Communication is intense between all the parts of the brain so it is unified already.
Page 267: “There are data showing that your conscious life can actually reconfigure your brain.”
The brain is reconfigured in many ways due to the environmental factors such as social situations, chemicals and drugs, physical environment, disease, emotions.
Mr. Moreland uses the example of prayer.
What your brain thinks can affect itself, the brain — another environmental factor that also may depend on factor listed earlier.
Page 269: “And scientists cannot explain the ‘why’ behind consciousness, because there’s no necessary connection between brain and consciousness.”
Oh? Philosophy deals with logic; science deals with measurement. As mentioned earlier, neurologists do have plausible explanations for the connection between consciousness and the brain.
From my researches I agree with:
Paul Jacobsen’s comments: Mental abilities emerge with the development of the brain – if the brain fails to develop so do the abilities. Mental and emotional functions are irreversibly lost when the brain is damaged by toxins, disease, accidents, malnutrition, and all factors that can affect the brain.
Why can’t the mind compensate for these losses? — the mind that Mr. Moreland says is separate from the brain?
Near death experiences: the actual experiences depend on the culture you were brought up in – an environmental factor. NDE can be neurologically triggered in a person that is far from dying — it is a brain phenomenon. Click.
Lack of answers is not sufficient reason to suppose the supernatural, including a supernatural God of the gaps. History shows these gaps are eventually filled with naturalistic solutions.
O. Hooge
Addendum: The following is from: http://www.imprint-academic.demon.co.uk/books/volitional_brain.html
Do We Have Free Will?
Libet B. Department of Physiology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-0444, USA
I have taken an experimental approach to this question. Freely voluntary acts are preceded by a specific electrical change in the brain (the ‘readiness potential’, RP) that begins 550 ms before the act. Human subjects became aware of intention to act 350-400 ms after RP starts, but 200 ms. before the motor act. The volitional process is therefore initiated unconsciously. But the conscious function could still control the outcome; it can veto the act. Free will is therefore not excluded. These findings put constraints on views of how free will may operate; it would not initiate a voluntary act but it could control performance of the act. The findings also affect views of guilt and responsibility. But the deeper question still remains: Are freely voluntary acts subject to macro-deterministic laws or can they appear without such constraints, non-determined by natural laws and ‘truly free’? I shall present an experimentalist view about these fundamental philosophical opposites. 1 ms = 0.001 seconds
Back to A critical Review of “The Case For a Creator” by Lee Strobel:
Naturalism and Religious Experience 