Thought on a Simple Argument for an Eternal and/or Uncaused Mind

In this thought, I wish to present a simple argument that provides the theist with ample rational justification to believe in the existence of an uncaused (and essentially eternal) mind, and this argument proceeds from the fact that 1) all propositional truths exist in a mind, for while truths do indeed exist, they do not exist as a “thing” in material reality but are rather conceptual in nature (for example, a rock just is, but the truth “A rock exists” is a truth that exists only in a mind), and yet, note that 2) some propositional truth has always existed and could not fail to exist (even if, for example, “nothing” material existed, it would still be true that “nothing material exists”, meaning that this truth exists), and so, since truths only exist in minds and since at least some truth has always existed, then, ergo, some uncaused and essentially eternal mind must exist to house those always existing truths (or at least an uncaused mind that did exist and then created other minds to take over from it before it ceased to exist); now again, this argument is not meant to be fool-proof (for almost no philosophical argument is fool-proof) but it is meant to show that the premises are entirely reasonable, rational, and eminently believable–arguably more believable than not–and thus that the theist, on the basis of this argument, can quite comfortably claim that he is rational in believing in either the present existence or former existence of an uncaused mind….(and note that any appeal to brains rather than minds will not do, as, first, I do not concede the existence of actual matter (you have to prove its existence to me), and second, an uncaused material mind (brain) could possibly exist, so the argument still stands).

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Thought on a Simple Argument for an Eternal and/or Uncaused Mind

  1. How do you defend the assertion that propositional truths must exist? It would seem to me that propositional truths are descriptions of things. It does not seem true that such descriptions must exist.

    Also, it seems necessary to presume Mind-Body dualism in order for this argument to be, at all, useful. How would you defend that proposition?

    Like

    • Boxing,

      Propositional truths…or let’s just call them truth, always exist, because some state of events will always be true. If nothing concrete exists, it will be truth that nothing concrete exists. If something exists, it will be true that something exists. Something will always be true….you cannot escape it.

      Furthermore, the mind could be material and eternal, so no, the argument does not need dualism. Furthermore, I am an immaterialist and do not accept the existence of matter as a metaphysical substance, so it is actually you, as a materialist, who has the burden of proof to show that matter does exist, not me who lacks a belief in matter.

      Like

      • Propositional truths…or let’s just call them truth, always exist, because some state of events will always be true.

        There seem to be two ways in which “propositional truths” can be defined, based upon the way you are utilizing the phrase. It seems that you are either referring to the properties inherent to a state, or else you are referring to descriptions of those properties.

        If you are referring to the properties inherent to a state, it does not seem that these properties necessarily exist in a mind. Quite the contrary, their existence seems to be in the existence of the state which bears them, and not in any mind.

        If you are referring to the descriptions of those properties, it does seem clear that such descriptions exist in the mind, but I see no reason why the description of a property must necessarily exist alongside the property, itself.

        Furthermore, the mind could be material and eternal, so no, the argument does not need dualism.

        This isn’t actually true for the specific argument which you presented. You explicitly discussed a state in which “nothing material exists.” This propositional truth, obviously, could not exist in a material mind, regardless of whether that material mind is eternal, since if a material mind exists then it would not be true that “nothing material exists.”

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s