Natural Teleology: More Thomas Nagel (The limitations of science)

by dhw, Friday, February 01, 2013, 20:16 (4311 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Another review of Nagel's ideas: Basically a good critique of scientific materialism, in which it is stated that Nagel doesn't think science will ever explain all unless consciousness is included as a basic component of the solution:-http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2013/01/30/is-scientific-materialism-al...-And offers no answer as usual.-DAVID: Another thoughtful review thinks Nagel is on the right track, but offers no answers:-http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/thomas-nagel-vs-his-critics-has-neo-d...-As I wrote in response to the first review, it seems to me that Nagel is groping towards some form of panpsychism. David, I think you have difficulty understanding why he calls himself an atheist. After all, he downgrades materialism, emphasizes the inability of science to understand consciousness, and is no doubt fully aware of the complexity of life. I certainly wish he was an agnostic, but he isn't, and I suspect the reason is that he can't accept the possibility of any kind of god. You yourself can understand this if it entails the conventional father figure with his multiple human attributes, but your own concept also has attributes: it is eternal and universal, it is aware of itself, it had a purpose in creating life (namely, to guide evolution towards the production of humans), it is "within and without" the universe. A force that is self-aware and that deliberately creates a mechanism leading to another being that is self-aware already has much in common with us humans ... not in the material sense but in the mental sense. And so even your relatively vague concept of God would be unacceptable to Nagel, if my reading of his mind is correct.-You say twice that Nagel "offers no answers". People who do offer answers will always find that their reasoning eventually runs into a brick wall, and the only way over that wall is through faith (as you readily acknowledge). This is vehemently denied by some atheists, who simply don't realize how improbable their alternatives are, and so I think it's to Nagel's credit that he recognizes the gaps in the materialist argument and is searching for a different route that will fill those gaps without creating others (as is the case with any form of God), and without resorting to faith. Even if he does "smell" like dhw and offers no answers, don't hold it against him!