Why should the human mind be able to comprehend reality so deeply? - referenced article

Science and Theism: Concord, not Conflict* – Robert C. Koons
IV. The Dependency of Science Upon Theism (Page 21)
Excerpt: Far from undermining the credibility of theism, the remarkable success of science in modern times is a remarkable confirmation of the truth of theism. It was from the perspective of Judeo-Christian theism—and from the perspective alone—that it was predictable that science would have succeeded as it has. Without the faith in the rational intelligibility of the world and the divine vocation of human beings to master it, modern science would never have been possible, and, even today, the continued rationality of the enterprise of science depends on convictions that can be reasonably grounded only in theistic metaphysics.

Jerry Coyne on the Scientific Method and Religion - Michael Egnor - June 2011
Excerpt: The scientific method -- the empirical systematic theory-based study of nature -- has nothing to so with some religious inspirations -- Animism, Paganism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Shintoism, Islam, and, well, atheism. The scientific method has everything to do with Christian (and Jewish) inspiration. Judeo-Christian culture is the only culture that has given rise to organized theoretical science. Many cultures (e.g. China) have produced excellent technology and engineering, but only Christian culture has given rise to a conceptual understanding of nature.

Of note:

Is Life Unique? David L. Abel - January 2012
Concluding Statement: The scientific method itself cannot be reduced to mass and energy. Neither can language, translation, coding and decoding, mathematics, logic theory, programming, symbol systems, the integration of circuits, computation, categorizations, results tabulation, the drawing and discussion of conclusions. The prevailing Kuhnian paradigm rut of philosophic physicalism is obstructing scientific progress, biology in particular. There is more to life than chemistry. All known life is cybernetic. Control is choice-contingent and formal, not physicodynamic.

"Nonphysical formalism not only describes, but preceded physicality and the Big Bang
Formalism prescribed, organized and continues to govern physicodynamics."

Moreover, the continued success of science can be argued to be dependent on Christianity

Bruce Charlton's Miscellany - October 2011
Excerpt: I had discovered that over the same period of the twentieth century that the US had risen to scientific eminence it had undergone a significant Christian revival. ,,,The point I put to (Richard) Dawkins was that the USA was simultaneously by-far the most dominant scientific nation in the world (I knew this from various scientometic studies I was doing at the time) and by-far the most religious (Christian) nation in the world. How, I asked, could this be - if Christianity was culturally inimical to science?

The following video is far more direct in establishing the 'spiritual' link to man's ability to learn new information (make scientific discoveries), in that it shows that the SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test) scores for students showed a steady decline, for seventeen years from the top spot, or near the top spot, in the world, after the removal of prayer from the public classroom by the Supreme Court in 1963. Whereas the SAT scores for private Christian schools have consistently remained at the top, or near the top, spot in the world:

The Real Reason American Education Has Slipped – David Barton – video

You can see that dramatic difference, of the SAT scores for private Christian schools compared to public schools, at this following site;

Aliso Viejo Christian School – SAT 10 Comparison Report

I find the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence by SETI to be amusing:

SETI - Search For Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence receives message from God,,,,, Almost - video

I find it strange that the SETI (Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence) organization spends millions of dollars vainly searching for signs of extra-terrestrial life in this universe, when all anyone has to do to make solid contact with THE primary 'extra-terrestrial intelligence' of the entire universe is to pray with a sincere heart. God certainly does not hide from those who sincerely seek Him. Actually communicating with the Creator of the universe is certainly a lot more exciting than not communicating with some little green men that in all probability do not even exist, unless of course, God decided to create them!

Isaiah 45:18-19
For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens, who is God, who formed the earth and made it, who established it, who did not create it in vain, who formed it to be inhabited: “I am the Lord, and there is no other. I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth; I did not say to the seed of Jacob, ‘seek me in vain’; I, the Lord speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.”

“When I was young, I said to God, 'God, tell me the mystery of the universe.' But God answered, 'That knowledge is for me alone.' So I said, 'God, tell me the mystery of the peanut.' Then God said, 'Well George, that's more nearly your size.' And he told me.”
George Washington Carver

Inventors - George Washington Carver
Excerpt: "God gave them to me" he (Carver) would say about his ideas, "How can I sell them to someone else?"

Hearing God – Are We Listening? – video

Further notes:

The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences - Eugene Wigner
Excerpt: The miracle of the appropriateness of the language of mathematics for the formulation of the laws of physics is a wonderful gift which we neither understand nor deserve. We should be grateful for it and hope that it will remain valid in future research and that it will extend, for better or for worse, to our pleasure, even though perhaps also to our bafflement, to wide branches of learning.

How can it be that mathematics, being after all a product of human thought which is independent of experience, is so admirably appropriate to the objects of reality? Is human reason, then, without experience, merely by taking thought, able to fathom the properties of real things?
— Albert Einstein

“Geometry is unique and eternal, a reflection from the mind of God. That mankind shares in it is because man is an image of God.” –
Johannes Kepler

Macroevolution, Good Science, and Redeeming Mathematics - Kate Deddens - Thursday, 16 February 2012
Excerpt: Kepler, a devout Christian, did not accept the ‘prevailing wisdom.’ He was convinced that an orderly God would not create ‘fuzzy’ phenomena and that there should be no need to ‘save’ the appearances. He spent years painstakingly analyzing the mathematical data. The end result was the discovery of elliptical, rather than circular, orbits. The face of astronomy changed forever. And furthermore, Kepler’s hypothesis not only ‘worked’ but it was ‘true:’ it correlated with an objective, physical reality.

This following site is a easy to use, and understand, interactive website that takes the user through what is termed 'Presuppositional apologetics'. The website clearly shows that our use of the laws of logic, mathematics, science and morality cannot be accounted for unless we believe in a God who guarantees our perceptions and reasoning are trustworthy in the first place.

Presuppositional Apologetics - easy to use interactive website

Random Chaos vs. Uniformity Of Nature - Presuppositional Apologetics - video

BRUCE GORDON: Hawking's irrational arguments - October 2010
Excerpt: For instance, we find multiverse cosmologists debating the "Boltzmann Brain" problem: In the most "reasonable" models for a multiverse, it is immeasurably more likely that our consciousness is associated with a brain that has spontaneously fluctuated into existence in the quantum vacuum than it is that we have parents and exist in an orderly universe with a 13.7 billion-year history. This is absurd. The multiverse hypothesis is therefore falsified because it renders false what we know to be true about ourselves. Clearly, embracing the multiverse idea entails a nihilistic irrationality that destroys the very possibility of science.

Materialism simply dissolves into absurdity when pushed to extremes and certainly offers no guarantee to us for believing our perceptions and reasoning within science are trustworthy in the first place:

Should You Trust the Monkey Mind? - Joe Carter
Excerpt: Evolutionary naturalism assumes that our noetic equipment developed as it did because it had some survival value or reproductive advantage. Unguided evolution does not select for belief except insofar as the belief improves the chances of survival. The truth of a belief is irrelevant, as long as it produces an evolutionary advantage. This equipment could have developed at least four different kinds of belief that are compatible with evolutionary naturalism, none of which necessarily produce true and trustworthy cognitive faculties.

What is the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism? ('inconsistent identity' of cause leads to failure of absolute truth claims for materialists) (Alvin Plantinga) - video

Can atheists trust their own minds? - William Lane Craig On Alvin Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism - video

The following interview is sadly comical as a evolutionary psychologist realizes that neo-Darwinism can offer no guarantee that our faculties of reasoning will correspond to the truth, not even for the truth he is giving in the interview, (which begs the question of how was he able to come to that particular truthful realization, in the first place, if neo-Darwinian evolution were actually true?);

Evolutionary guru: Don't believe everything you think - October 2011
Interviewer: You could be deceiving yourself about that.(?)
Evolutionary Psychologist: Absolutely.

Here a Darwinian Psychologist has a moment of honesty facing the 'hard problem' of consciousness;

Darwinian Psychologist David Barash Admits the Seeming Insolubility of Science's "Hardest Problem"
Excerpt: 'But the hard problem of consciousness is so hard that I can't even imagine what kind of empirical findings would satisfactorily solve it. In fact, I don't even know what kind of discovery would get us to first base, not to mention a home run.'
David Barash - Materialist/Atheist Darwinian Psychologist

“Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning...”
CS Lewis – Mere Christianity

"But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?" -
Charles Darwin - Letter To William Graham - July 3, 1881

“It seems to me immensely unlikely that mind is a mere by-product of matter. For if my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of atoms in my brain I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs are true. They may be sound chemically, but that does not make them sound logically. And hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms.”
J. B. S. Haldane ["When I am dead," in Possible Worlds: And Other Essays [1927], Chatto and Windus: London, 1932, reprint, p.209.

This following video humorously reveals the bankruptcy that atheists have in trying to ground beliefs within a materialistic worldview;

John Cleese – The Scientists – humorous video

It is also interesting to point out that this ‘inconsistent identity’, pointed out by Plantinga, which leads to the failure of neo-Darwinists to make absolute truth claims for their beliefs, is what also leads to the failure of neo-Darwinists to be able to account for objective morality, in that neo-Darwinists cannot maintain a consistent identity towards a stable, unchanging, cause for objective morality;

The Knock-Down Argument Against Atheist Sam Harris – William Lane Craig – video

Stephen Meyer - Morality Presupposes Theism (1 of 4) - video

"Atheists may do science, but they cannot justify what they do. When they assume the world is rational, approachable, and understandable, they plagiarize Judeo-Christian presuppositions about the nature of reality and the moral need to seek the truth. As an exercise, try generating a philosophy of science from hydrogen coming out of the big bang. It cannot be done. It’s impossible even in principle, because philosophy and science presuppose concepts that are not composed of particles and forces. They refer to ideas that must be true, universal, necessary and certain." Creation-Evolution Headlines

Atheism cannot ground Morality or Science

John Lennox - Science Is Impossible Without God - Quotes - video remix

John Lennox - Belief in God drove the founding of modern science - audio

Here are some very strong indications that design in nature is not merely 'subjectively' imposed by us:

The very conditions that make Earth hospitable to intelligent life also make it well suited to viewing and analyzing the universe as a whole.
- Jay Richards

Privileged Planet - Observability Correlation - Gonzalez and Richards - video

We Live At The Right Time In Cosmic History - Hugh Ross - video

Extreme Fine Tuning of Light for Life and Scientific Discovery - video

Stephen C. Meyer - The Scientific Basis For the Intelligent Design Inference - video

There remains one and only one type of cause that has shown itself able to create functional information like we find in cells, books and software programs -- intelligent design. We know this from our uniform experience and from the design filter -- a mathematically rigorous method of detecting design. Both yield the same answer. (William Dembski and Jonathan Witt, Intelligent Design Uncensored: An Easy-to-Understand Guide to the Controversy, p. 90 (InterVarsity Press, 2010).)

As well, consciousness itself is found to be far more foundational to reality than what many scientists had at first believed (and even more foundational to reality than what many 'scientists' now believe, even though we now have the conclusive evidence to show that consciousness is foundational to reality):

Alain Aspect and Anton Zeilinger by Richard Conn Henry - Physics Professor - John Hopkins University
Excerpt: Why do people cling with such ferocity to belief in a mind-independent reality? It is surely because if there is no such reality, then ultimately (as far as we can know) mind alone exists. And if mind is not a product of real matter, but rather is the creator of the "illusion" of material reality (which has, in fact, despite the materialists, been known to be the case, since the discovery of quantum mechanics in 1925), then a theistic view of our existence becomes the only rational alternative to solipsism (solipsism is the philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist). (Dr. Henry's referenced experiment and paper - “An experimental test of non-local realism” by S. Gröblacher et. al., Nature 446, 871, April 2007 - “To be or not to be local” by Alain Aspect, Nature 446, 866, April 2007

Quantum mind–body problem
Parallels between quantum mechanics and mind/body dualism were first drawn by the founders of quantum mechanics including Erwin Schrödinger, Werner Heisenberg, Wolfgang Pauli, Niels Bohr, and Eugene Wigner

“It was not possible to formulate the laws (of quantum theory) in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness.”
Eugene Wigner (1902 -1995) from his collection of essays “Symmetries and Reflections – Scientific Essays”; (Eugene Wigner laid the foundation for the theory of symmetries in quantum mechanics, for which he received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1963)

"It will remain remarkable, in whatever way our future concepts may develop, that the very study of the external world led to the scientific conclusion that the content of the consciousness is the ultimate universal reality" -
Eugene Wigner - (Remarks on the Mind-Body Question, Eugene Wigner, in Wheeler and Zurek, p.169) - received Nobel Prize in 1963 for 'Quantum Symmetries'

Here is the key experiment that led Wigner to his Nobel Prize winning work on quantum symmetries:

Eugene Wigner
Excerpt: To express this basic experience in a more direct way: the world does not have a privileged center, there is no absolute rest, preferred direction, unique origin of calendar time, even left and right seem to be rather symmetric. The interference of electrons, photons, neutrons has indicated that the state of a particle can be described by a vector possessing a certain number of components. As the observer is replaced by another observer (working elsewhere, looking at a different direction, using another clock, perhaps being left-handed), the state of the very same particle is described by another vector, obtained from the previous vector by multiplying it with a matrix. This matrix transfers from one observer to another.

i.e. In the experiment the ‘world’ (i.e. the universe) does not have a ‘privileged center’. Yet strangely, the conscious observer does exhibit a ‘privileged center’. This is since the ‘matrix’, which determines which vector will be used to describe the particle in the experiment, is ‘observer-centric’ in its origination! Thus explaining Wigner’s dramatic statement, “It was not possible to formulate the laws (of quantum theory) in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness.”

“I’m going to talk about the Bell inequality, and more importantly a new inequality that you might not have heard of called the Leggett inequality, that was recently measured, it was actually formulated almost 30 years ago by Professor Leggett, who is a Nobel Prize winner, but it wasn’t tested until about a year and a half ago (in 2007), when an article appeared in Nature, that the measurement was made by this prominent quantum group in Vienna led by Anton Zeilinger, which they measured the Leggett inequality, which actually goes a step deeper than the Bell inequality and rules out any possible interpretation other than consciousness creates reality when the measurement is made.” – Bernard Haisch, Ph.D., Calphysics Institute, is an astrophysicist and author of over 130 scientific publications.

Preceding quote taken from 3:50 minute mark of this following video;

Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness: A New Measurement 2/4

This following experiment extended Wheeler’s delayed choice double slit experiment (which is really a ‘mind’ blowing experiment) to highlight the centrality of a ‘conscious observer’ in the Double Slit Experiment and refutes any ‘detector centered’ arguments for why the wave collapses:

(Double Slit) A Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser – updated 2007
Excerpt: Upon accessing the information gathered by the Coincidence Circuit, we the observer are shocked to learn that the pattern shown by the positions registered at D0 (Detector Zero) at Time 2 depends entirely on the information gathered later at Time 4 and available to us at the conclusion of the experiment.

i.e. This experiment clearly shows that the ‘material’ detector is secondary in the experiment and that a conscious observer, being able to know the information of which path a photon takes with local certainty, is primary to the wave collapsing to a particle in the experiment.

It is also very interesting to note that some materialists seem to have a very hard time grasping the simple point of these extended double slit experiments, but to try to put it more clearly; To explain an event which defies time and space, as the quantum erasure experiment clearly does, you cannot appeal to any material entity in the experiment like the detector, or any other 3D physical part of the experiment, which is itself constrained by the limits of time and space. To give an adequate explanation for defying time and space one is forced to appeal to a transcendent entity which is itself not confined by time or space. But then again I guess I can see why forcing someone, who claims to be a atheistic materialist, to appeal to a non-material transcendent entity, to give an adequate explanation for such a ‘spooky’ event, would invoke such utter confusion on their part. Yet to try to put it in even more ‘shocking’ terms for the atheists, the ‘shocking’ conclusion of the experiment is that a transcendent Mind, with a capital M, must precede the collapse of quantum waves to 3-Dimensional particles. Moreover, it is impossible for a human mind to ever ‘emerge’ from any 3-D material basis which is dependent on a preceding conscious cause for its own collapse to a 3D state in the first place. This is more than a slight problem for the atheistic-evolutionary materialist who insists that our minds simply ‘emerged’, or evolved, from a conglomeration of 3D matter.

Moreover, the argument for God from consciousness can be framed like this:

1. Consciousness either preceded all of material reality or is a 'epi-phenomena' of material reality.
2. If consciousness is a 'epi-phenomena' of material reality then consciousness will be found to have no special position within material reality. Whereas conversely, if consciousness precedes material reality then consciousness will be found to have a special position within material reality.
3. Consciousness is found to have a special, even central, position within material reality.
4. Therefore, consciousness is found to precede material reality.

The following is an interesting way for establishing the ‘spiritual’ aspect of man. The first part of Szostak’s functional information paper reads:

Complex emergent systems, in which interactions among numerous components or agents produce patterns or behaviors not obtainable by individual components, are ubiquitous at every scale of the physical universe,

and If you strip out the punctuation and spaces from that sentence, there are a total of 181 alphabetic characters there. How many possible arrangements of 26 letters in a sequence 181 characters long can there be? 26^181, or 1.3 x 10^256. It’s huge! If we take the -log2, we find that we could encode that one specific sentence in 851 functional information bits.

And yet even the entire material processes of the universe, over the entire history of the universe, cannot reasonably be expected to generate even that 851 functional information bits:

Book Review – Meyer, Stephen C. Signature in the Cell. New York: HarperCollins, 2009.
Excerpt: Even if you grant the most generous assumptions: that every elementary particle in the observable universe is a chemical laboratory randomly splicing amino acids into proteins every Planck time for the entire history of the universe, there is a vanishingly small probability that even a single functionally folded protein of 150 amino acids would have been created. Now of course, elementary particles aren’t chemical laboratories, nor does peptide synthesis take place where most of the baryonic mass of the universe resides: in stars or interstellar and intergalactic clouds,,, Now, if you go back to the universe of elementary particle Planck time chemical labs and work the numbers, you find that in the finite time our universe has existed, you could have produced about 500 bits of structured, functional information by random search.

Thus since our minds/brains are ‘easily’ producing more functional information bits than all the material particles of the universe can reasonably be expected to, over the entire history in the universe, every time we write even just one sentence, then it naturally follows, compellingly, that there is something that is transcendent within us that is not reducible to the material particles of our brain. The ‘material’ particles of our brain, and all their complex interactions (no matter how funky the interactions of material particles may be envisioned to be) are simply grossly insufficient as a resource to explain the origination (emergence) of the functional information we witness continually coming from humans. ,,,

Of related interest to man's unique ability to understand and communicate functional information, it is found that reality at its most foundation level is not 'material' particles, as is falsely envisioned by most people, but the foundation of reality is in fact 'bits' of information:

Why the Quantum? It from Bit? A Participatory Universe?
Excerpt: In conclusion, it may very well be said that information is the irreducible kernel from which everything else flows. Thence the question why nature appears quantized is simply a consequence of the fact that information itself is quantized by necessity. It might even be fair to observe that the concept that information is fundamental is very old knowledge of humanity, witness for example the beginning of gospel according to John: "In the beginning was the Word." Anton Zeilinger - a leading expert in quantum teleportation:

Zeilinger's principle
The principle that any elementary system carries just one bit of information. This principle was put forward by the Austrian physicist Anton Zeilinger in 1999 and subsequently developed by him to derive several aspects of quantum mechanics.

In the beginning was the bit - New Scientist
Excerpt: Zeilinger's principle leads to the intrinsic randomness found in the quantum world. Consider the spin of an electron. Say it is measured along a vertical axis (call it the z axis) and found to be pointing up. Because one bit of information has been used to make that statement, no more information can be carried by the electron's spin. Consequently, no information is available to predict the amounts of spin in the two horizontal directions (x and y axes), so they are of necessity entirely random. If you then measure the spin in one of these directions, there is an equal chance of its pointing right or left, forward or back. This fundamental randomness is what we call Heisenberg's uncertainty principle.

Thus man, alone among all the animals on earth, has a unique ability to understand complex functional information, which 'just so happens' to correspond directly to fact that reality, at its most foundational level, is reducible to a purely information basis. It would be hard to think of any more convincing piece of evidence indicating that we were created in the image of God image to have a relationship with Him!

further notes:

The Day I Died – Part 4 of 6 – The Extremely ‘Monitored’ Near Death Experience of Pam Reynolds – video

The Scientific Evidence for Near Death Experiences – Dr Jeffery Long – Melvin Morse M.D. – video

Blind Woman Can See During Near Death Experience (NDE) – Pim von Lommel – video

Kenneth Ring and Sharon Cooper (1997) conducted a study of 31 blind people, many of who reported vision during their Near Death Experiences (NDEs). 21 of these people had had an NDE while the remaining 10 had had an out-of-body experience (OBE), but no NDE. It was found that in the NDE sample, about half had been blind from birth. (of note: This ‘anomaly’ is also found for deaf people who can hear sound during their Near Death Experiences(NDEs).)

Does Quantum Biology Support A Quantum Soul? – Stuart Hameroff – video (notes in description)

Is the Brain Just an Illusion? – Anika Smith interviews Denyse O’Leary – podcast

The Mind and Materialist Superstition – Six “conditions of mind” that are irreconcilable with materialism:

Angus Menuge Interviewed by Apologetics 315 - audio interview
Description: Today's interview is with Dr. Angus Menuge, Professor of Philosophy at Concordia University, and author of Agents Under Fire: Materialism and the Rationality of Science. He talks about his background and work, the philosophy of mind, what reason (or reasoning) is, what materialism is as a worldview, things excluded from a materialistic worldview, methodological naturalism and materialism, accounting for free will, materialistic accounts of reason, the epistemological argument from reason, the ontological argument from reason, finding the best explanation for reason, problems with methodological naturalism, implications of materialism, practical application of the argument from reason, advice for apologists, the International Academy of Apologetics, and more.

Materialism and Human Dignity – Casey Luskin interviews Michael Egnor, professor of neurosurgery at SUNY, Stony Brook, on the relationship between the mind and the brain. – podcast

Centrality of Each Individual Observer In The Universe and Christ’s Very Credible Reconciliation Of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics

Entire interview;

RC Sproul Interviews Stephen Meyer - Presuppositional Apologetics (and Scientific Argument for ID from presently acting cause known to produce effect in question)

Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis

There Is More – Poem – video

Loading more stuff…

Hmm…it looks like things are taking a while to load. Try again?

Loading videos…