TWO New arguments

There's the famous question "what is it like to be a bat?". That question is asking what the subjective experience of a bat is like (assuming it has one). It is possible to deny the existence of all of your surroundings. "It could all be the matrix". But there is one single thing you cannot deny, it's that your own subjective experience exists.

That's why it's so beautiful that subjective experience conflicts with atheism and in multiple ways. For context, scientists and academics have no idea why subjective experience exists (it also goes by the name consciousness/qualia). Why is it "like something" to be a human? Will it ever be "like something" to be an AI?

Your brain is just a complex chemical reaction that does calculations. Dominos can do all the same calculations, it will never really make physical sense why dominos in a dark room, regardless of how elaborately setup, can summon subjective experience and things like color (there's no light photons in your brain). 

The world would make a lot more sense if your subjective experience didn’t exist and your body was just the soulless robot it should be.

The above intro is not essential to the arguments, so don't bother responding to the intro. To me, subjective experience clearly comes from a soul/something not physical. I can also logically prove this with argument 1. Then I will prove humans are intentionally designed with argument 2.

Argument 1: Proving there is more than the physical

There’s the idea that over 7 years of eating food, your body becomes all new matter. So let’s compare two hypothetical possibilities:

Everything about the final body should be and emerge the same (same gravity etc.)

But despite the resulting body being physically the same, odds are you prefer one end result over another. 

Stand up and play out both scenarios.

There is clearly one scenario where you are looking out of the final body and one where you are not. (you as in the subjective experience I’m speaking to right now).

With both hypotheticals resulting in bodies of the same instances of protein bar, composition, location, and time. I can create a very simple one premise argument:

Argument 2: Proving intelligent design

This argument may seem unintuitive at first, but I guarantee you that if a human understands and thinks about this argument enough. They will know with absolute certainty that humans are intentionally designed.

Your brain is essentially an elaborate domino setup, located in a pitch-black room. Despite there being no light photons in your brain somehow color and subjective experience emerge from this domino set.

Scientists and academics have yet to understand how or why. Simply because it just doesn’t make physical sense that it would be “like something” to be an elaborate domino set or really any physical process.

Regardless of your beliefs around subjective experience. Everyone can agree that some kind of phenomenon clearly exists. It is indeed “like something” to be you.

We are also aware of characteristics for this phenomenon. You’re aware that your subjective experience is only connected to one body and not multiple.

It also connects to all five of your senses, instead of having one separate subjective experience for each of your senses. The list of known characteristics could be very long, but you get the point.

Now if those 3 statements are true, then I need causation to tie the existence of consciousness to my belief of consciousness.

It’s possible that my phone has consciousness, that it's "like something" to be an iPhone. But that doesn't mean that my phone is aware of that fact, nowhere in its physical code exists the line "Some phenomenon with XYZ characteristics emerges from me".

Essentially the question is how does the existence of subjective experience cause my brain to speak/believe that subjective experience exists. In fact, it doesn't matter what direction you try to put the causation. The only possible causation to tie the two together is some form of highly intelligent design.

The simple explanation is this, the emergence of subjective experience just doesn't have physical impact. The structures that might cause subjective experience may be important. But whether or not it's "like something" to be my iPhone or not, we don't really care. It all physically functions the same, everything follows the physical code that we programmed in. You are only so different from a phone. People mystify the brain too much, your body is just carbon based robot. Your body is a fancy domino set.

Whether or not it's like something to be a human or a domino set does not matter. All of the dominos will fall the same and your physical network of neurons will fire the same. The dominos aren't going to start sliding around to program the output "XYZ phenomenon emerges from me". No matter how hard you look, you won't find some strange consciousness force that does that.

How do I get a phenomenon without that kind of physical impact to influence your physical body to have a specific belief? Well you would need a 3rd party force/being to manually align your body's belief of subjective experience to the phenomenon's existence.

That 3rd party would also have to be incredibly intelligent to be able to influence human genetics/your brain in such a specific way (we have yet to be able to do such feats) and additionally that force would have to be aware of subjective experience in the first place (something that an omniscient God would obviously be aware of).

The long explanation is that it doesn't matter if the emergence of subjective experience has physical impact or not. The only possible causation tying 1 & 2 together is some form of highly intelligent design.

The human brain is simply too complicated. Even if I gave you all of our technology and the ability to change universal constants like gravity, you still wouldn’t be able to instill specific absolute beliefs into our genetics like that. (And that is intelligent design, just not intelligent enough).

Whatever force/being caused 1 & 2 to line up, clearly did it with intention and high intelligence. It was something that had knowledge of this phenomenon and had incentive to align 1 & 2. 

Atheists who deny the involvement of a highly intelligent force/being, will never have a possible causation to tie 1 & 2 together.

Try to view your body as the robot it is and ask how the existence of this phenomenon could so specifically affect a robot’s code/binary like this. Also Imagine if the laws of subjective experience were instead 1 consciousness connected to every single body. How would belief of that characteristic show up in my brain instead?

Something like evolution does not help. Firstly, it’s absurd to say there is evolutionary pressure for your body to have such a belief (I don’t care what kind of evolution simulation you run). Second, it wouldn’t matter if there was evolutionary pressure, you would still be saying you’re your evolutionary absolute belief of some crazy magic-like phenomenon just so happens to be exactly spot on.

You have to remember that under the standard atheist view, humans are an unintended feature of the world from random particle interactions.

I need causation to tie 1 & 2 together, and once again the only possible causation is some form of highly intelligent design.

I know with absolute certainty that the standard atheist worldview is wrong.

Email: ponderpointscontact@gmail.com