(Sep 24, 2017 12:15 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Science doesn't even have a tentative hypothesis to explain qualia. Considering we experience all reality through our subjective perception, that's a very large something else that definitely does beg a posited explanation.
Here we go again with your god of the gaps. It’s just your cheap goTo debating trick. Just because something is currently unsolved doesn’t mean that it’s open to you. You can’t just toss in your lazy ass opinions as if they constitute an explanation.
I don't feel very qualia at most times. Not enough qualia in the world for me. My subjective experience hasn't reached the depths or heights, depending on the individual sentiment, to convince me that an omni everything being can just pop into existence. I willingly concede to something popping into existence from nothing but Omni God is a whole lot of something IMHO.
(Sep 25, 2017 02:25 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ] (Sep 24, 2017 12:15 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Science doesn't even have a tentative hypothesis to explain qualia. Considering we experience all reality through our subjective perception, that's a very large something else that definitely does beg a posited explanation.
Here we go again with your god of the gaps. It’s just your cheap goTo debating trick. Just because something is currently unsolved doesn’t mean that it’s open to you. You can’t just toss in your lazy ass opinions as if they constitute an explanation.
Just because something is currently unsolved (and admittedly scientifically unsolvable) doesn't mean that it's open to your
scientism (i.e. science of the gaps). Scientism is just as much a "cheap goto (sic) debating trick" as god of the gaps. The difference between you and I is that I don't tout mine as anything but opinion.
You can’t just toss in your lazy ass opinions as if they constitute legit scientific explanation.