How does materialistic science scientifically prove the mind? Answer, it can’t.
The mind and brain are separate. Can you use scientific naturalism (the same premise atheists use to try and disprove God) to prove the mind? No.
Oh, boy am I gonna have fun with you!
1) Atheism is not necessarily tied to “materialistic science” whatever that means. In other words, one could already believe your premise, that the mind is separate from the brain, and still not believe a god exists.
2) It’s not the default position to say if something can’t be explained it must be a god. Saying people who believe in “materialistic science” owe you an explanation is just one of your many many uses of the argument from ignorance. You should really make yourself familiar with that, because I’m about to call you out on it. A lot.
3) Your creationist speaker simply declares the mind is not material and that it isn’t just the brain, but he doesn’t give any evidence or even reasoning for that. We know the brain is the mind because that’s what’s been observed (to make a long story short).
4) Nobody has ever said human beings are not really conscious, you need to provide an example of that or else I call straw man.
5) So, if I’m to follow this jackanape’s logic: saying there is no consciousness amount to an admission that there are minds? Yeah, I don’t think that’s a linear thought.
6) He makes a huge leap in logic by saying immaterial minds are souls.
7) Then the biggest leap of all, this idea that even if there were a soul that that means there’s a god. Look, the Bible or whatever fairy tale you like says god created trees, but the existence of trees doesn’t impact the truth value of the god claim. Same goes for souls, for which there is no evidence anyway, but even if there were, it doesn’t do anything to the god claim.
atheist, atheists, atheism, agnostic, agnosticism, Christianity, Christ, Christian, faith, god, bible, prayer, evolution, creation, creationism, religion, Bible, philosophy,
