Home Proving God without Dualism: Improving the Swinburne-Moreland Argument from Consciousness
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Proving God without Dualism: Improving the Swinburne-Moreland Argument from Consciousness

  • Ward Blondé EMAIL logo and Ludger Jansen ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: March 26, 2021

Abstract

With substance dualism and the existence of God, Swinburne (2004, The Existence of God, Oxford University Press, Oxford) and Moreland (2010, Consciousness and the Existence of God, Routledge, New York) have argued for a very powerful explanatory mechanism that can readily explain several philosophical problems related to consciousness. However, their positions come with presuppositions and ontological commitments which many are not prepared to share. The aim of this paper is to improve on the Swinburne-Moreland argument from consciousness by developing an argument for the existence of God from consciousness without being committed to substance dualism. The argument proceeds by suggesting a solution to the exceptional-point-of-view problem, i.e., the question how it can be explained that there is a conscious being lucky enough to experience the point of view of a relatively tiny brain amidst a giant universe that is indifferent about which physical entities it brings about according to the laws of physics.


Corresponding author: Ward Blondé, Independent, Ghent, Belgium, E-mail: ; and Ludger Jansen, Centre for Philosophy of Science, University of Münster, Domplatz 23, 48143Münster, Germany; and Institute of Philosophy, University of Rostock, 18051Rostock, Germany, E-mail:

References

Ade, P. A. R., et al.. 2014. “Planck 2013 Results. XVI. Cosmological Parameters.” Astronomy & Astrophysics 571: A16.10.1051/0004-6361/201321591Search in Google Scholar

Blondé, W. 2019. “EMAAN: An Evolutionary Multiverse Argument against Naturalism.” Symposion 6 (2): 113–28.10.5840/symposion2019629Search in Google Scholar

Bostrom, N. 2003. “Are We Living in a Computer Simulation?” The Philosophical Quarterly 53 (211): 243–55.10.1111/1467-9213.00309Search in Google Scholar

Brüntrup, G. 2016. Das Leib-Seele-Problem. Eine Einführung, 5th ed. München: Kohlhammer.10.17433/978-3-17-030948-7Search in Google Scholar

Chalmers, D. J. 2007. “The Hard Problem of Consciousness.” In The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness, edited by M. Vellman, and S. Schneider, 225–35. Malden MA: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470751466.ch18Search in Google Scholar

Chalmers, D. J. 2015. “Panpsychism and Panprotopsychism.” In Consciousness in the Physical World: Perspectives on Russellian Monism, edited by T. A. Alter, and Y. Nagasawa, 246–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199359943.003.0002Search in Google Scholar

Churchland, P. S. 1988. “Reduction and the Neurobiological Basis of Consciousness.” In Consciousness in Contemporary Science, edited by A. J. Marcel, and E. Bisiach, 273–304. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198522379.003.0013Search in Google Scholar

Clayton, P. 2020. “Spielarten des Panpsychismus.” In Welt – Geist – Gott. Erkundungen zu Panpsychismus und Panentheismus, edited by B. P. Göcke, K. Müller, and F. Schiefen, 1–15. Münster: Aschendorff.Search in Google Scholar

Dennett, D. 2000. “Facing Backwards on the Problem of Consciousness.” In Explaining Consciousness: The “Hard Problem”, edited by J. Shear, 33–6. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Goff, P. 2017. Consciousness and Fundamental Reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780190677015.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Goff, P. 2019. “Did the Universe Design Itself?” International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 85 (1): 99–122.10.1007/s11153-018-9692-zSearch in Google Scholar

Herculano-Houzel, S. 2009. “The Human Brain in Numbers: a Linearly Scaled-up Primate Brain.” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 3: 31.10.3389/neuro.09.031.2009Search in Google Scholar

Kim, J. 1992. “‘Downward Causation’ in Emergentism and Nonreductive Physicalism.” In Emergence or Reduction? Essays on the Prospects of Nonreductive Physicalism, edited by A. Beckermann, 119–38. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110870084.119Search in Google Scholar

Levine, J. 1983. “Materialism and Qualia: The Explanatory Gap.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 64 (4): 354–61.10.1111/j.1468-0114.1983.tb00207.xSearch in Google Scholar

Lewis, D. K. 1986. On the Plurality of Worlds. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

McLaughlin, B. P. 1989. “Type Epiphenomenalism, Type Dualism, and the Causal Priority of the Physical.” Philosophical Perspectives 3: 109–35.10.2307/2214265Search in Google Scholar

Moreland, J. P. 2010. Consciousness and the Existence of God: A Theistic Argument. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203929339Search in Google Scholar

Nagel, T. 1974. “What is it like to be a Bat?” The Philosophical Review 83 (4): 435–50.10.1017/CBO9781107341050.014Search in Google Scholar

Putnam, H. 1981. Reason, Truth, and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511625398Search in Google Scholar

Seager, W. E. 1988. “Descartes on the Union of Mind and Body.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 5 (2): 119–32.Search in Google Scholar

Smolin, L. 1992. “Did the Universe Evolve?” Classical and Quantum Gravity 9 (1): 173–91.10.1088/0264-9381/9/1/016Search in Google Scholar

Swinburne, R. 1984. “Personal Identity: The Dualist Theory.” In Personal Identity, edited by R. Swinburne, and S. Shoemaker, 1–66. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Swinburne, R. 2004. The Existence of God. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199271672.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Van Inwagen, P. 1998. The Possibility of Resurrection and Other Essays in Christian Apologetics. Boulder CO: Westview.Search in Google Scholar

Vilenkin, A. 2007. “A Measure of the Multiverse.” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 40 (25): 6777.10.1088/1751-8113/40/25/S22Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2021-03-26
Published in Print: 2021-04-27

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 10.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/mp-2020-0035/html
Scroll to top button