Written and collected by Zia H Shah MD, Chief Editor of the Muslim Times

The argument from consciousness is an argument for the existence of God that claims characteristics of human consciousness (such as qualia) cannot be explained by the physical mechanisms of the human body and brain, therefore asserting that there must be non-physical aspects to human consciousness. This is held as indirect evidence of God, given that notions about souls and the afterlife in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam would be consistent with such a claim.

The best-known defender of the argument from consciousness is J. P. Moreland.

Richard Swinburne

Richard Swinburne, a prominent philosopher of religion, presents the “argument from consciousness” as a component of his broader case for the existence of God. This argument posits that the presence of conscious experiences in humans is more plausibly explained by the existence of a divine being than by naturalistic processes alone.

The Inductive Argument from Consciousness

In his work “The Existence of God,” Swinburne formulates an inductive argument centered on the phenomenon of consciousness. He suggests that the correlation between physical brain states and non-physical mental states cannot be adequately accounted for by scientific explanations alone. Instead, he proposes that a personal explanation, specifically the existence of God, offers a more satisfactory account of this relationship. Swinburne argues that the regular association between mental and physical events is best understood as the result of intentional design by a conscious deity.

Wikipedia

Personal vs. Scientific Explanations

Swinburne distinguishes between two types of explanations:

1. Scientific Explanations: These account for phenomena through natural laws and processes.
2. Personal Explanations: These attribute events to the intentions and actions of conscious agents.

He contends that while scientific explanations are effective in many domains, they fall short in elucidating the existence and nature of consciousness. Therefore, a personal explanation, involving a divine consciousness, is more appropriate for understanding the origin of human consciousness.

Wikipedia

Support from Other Theists

Philosophers like Robert Adams have offered similar arguments, focusing on the regular correlations between mental and physical states. These arguments often take a deductive form, aiming to demonstrate that the best explanation for these correlations is the existence of a theistic God.

Wikipedia

Conclusion

Swinburne’s argument from consciousness contributes to the broader discourse on the existence of God by highlighting the challenges naturalistic explanations face in accounting for consciousness. By proposing that a divine being provides a more coherent explanation for the phenomenon of consciousness, Swinburne adds a significant perspective to philosophical discussions on the intersection of mind and divinity.

Robert Adams

Robert Adams, a distinguished philosopher, has contributed to the discourse on the existence of God through what is known as the “argument from consciousness.” This argument posits that the existence of conscious experiences, particularly the correlation between mental and physical states, is best explained by the presence of a divine being.

The Deductive Form of the Argument

Adams’ approach to the argument from consciousness is structured deductively, focusing on the regular correlations between mental states (such as thoughts and feelings) and physical states (such as brain activities). The argument can be outlined as follows:

1. Existence of Non-Physical Mental States: Mental states are genuine non-physical entities that exist.
2. Correlation Between Mental and Physical States: Specific mental and physical event types are regularly correlated.
3. Necessity of an Explanation: There is an explanation for these correlations.
4. Types of Explanations: Personal explanation (attributing to the intentions of a conscious agent) is different from natural scientific explanation (attributing to physical laws and processes).
5. Explanatory Options: The explanation for these correlations is either a personal or a natural scientific one.
6. Inadequacy of Scientific Explanation: The explanation is not a natural scientific one.
7. Conclusion of Personal Explanation: Therefore, the explanation is a personal one.
8. Identification of the Personal Explanation: If the explanation is personal, then it is theistic.
9. Final Conclusion: Therefore, the explanation is theistic.

This formulation suggests that the regular correlations between mental and physical states cannot be fully accounted for by natural scientific explanations alone, thereby implying the necessity of a theistic explanation.

Wikipedia

Comparison with Other Theistic Arguments

Adams’ argument shares similarities with those of other theistic philosophers, such as Richard Swinburne, who also employs the argument from consciousness in an inductive form. However, Adams’ version is distinct in its deductive structure, aiming to provide a logically conclusive case for theism based on the existence and nature of consciousness.

Wikipedia

Critiques and Discussions

The argument from consciousness has been subject to various critiques, particularly from physicalist perspectives that argue for a purely naturalistic explanation of consciousness. Philosophers Kevin Kimble and Timothy O’Connor have revisited this argument, examining the challenges posed by physicalist accounts and exploring the viability of theistic explanations for consciousness.

ToConnor

Conclusion

Robert Adams’ argument from consciousness offers a deductive framework suggesting that the existence and nature of conscious experiences point toward a theistic explanation. By emphasizing the correlations between mental and physical states and the limitations of natural scientific explanations in accounting for these correlations, Adams contributes a significant perspective to the philosophical discourse on the existence of God.

William Lane Craig

William Lane Craig, a prominent philosopher and theologian, has articulated an argument for the existence of God based on the phenomenon of consciousness. This argument, known as the “argument from consciousness,” posits that the existence of intentional states of consciousness is best explained by the presence of a divine being.

Formulation of the Argument

Craig’s argument is structured deductively as follows:

1. Premise 1: If God did not exist, intentional states of consciousness would not exist.
2. Premise 2: Intentional states of consciousness do exist.
3. Conclusion: Therefore, God exists.

This syllogism suggests that the reality of intentional consciousness implies the existence of God.

Wikipedia

Understanding Intentional States

Intentional states of consciousness refer to mental states that are about or directed toward something, such as beliefs, desires, and thoughts. These states possess intentionality, meaning they are directed at objects or states of affairs. Craig argues that such intentionality cannot be adequately explained by naturalistic or physicalist accounts, which often struggle to account for the ‘aboutness’ inherent in mental states.

Defense of the Premises

• Premise 1: Craig contends that naturalism, which denies the existence of anything beyond the physical world, lacks the resources to account for intentional states. He argues that physical processes, described in terms of cause and effect, do not inherently possess intentionality. Therefore, if only the physical exists, intentional states would not exist.
• Premise 2: The existence of intentional states is evident through our direct introspective awareness of our own mental experiences. We are conscious of our thoughts being about various things, which affirms the reality of intentionality.

Conclusion

Given the existence of intentional states and the inadequacy of naturalistic explanations to account for them, Craig concludes that a theistic explanation is more plausible. He posits that a divine mind, characterized by intentionality, serves as the grounding for the intentional states observed in human consciousness.

Relation to Other Philosophical Arguments

Craig’s argument aligns with similar arguments proposed by other philosophers. For instance, J.P. Moreland has developed an argument from consciousness that emphasizes the existence of non-physical mental states and their correlation with physical states, concluding that a theistic explanation is necessary.

Internet Archive

Critiques and Discussions

The argument from consciousness has been subject to various critiques, particularly from physicalist perspectives that argue for a purely naturalistic explanation of consciousness. Philosophers like Andrew Melnyk have offered critiques of the premise that naturalism cannot account for non-physical mental states, suggesting that physicalist accounts can, in fact, accommodate consciousness within an atheistic worldview.

Wikipedia

Conclusion

William Lane Craig’s argument from consciousness offers a philosophical perspective that seeks to demonstrate the existence of God through the reality of intentional mental states. By highlighting the challenges naturalistic explanations face in accounting for intentionality, Craig provides a theistic framework as a more coherent and plausible explanation for the phenomenon of consciousness.

J.P. Moreland

J.P. Moreland, a distinguished philosopher, presents a compelling case for the existence of God through what is known as the “argument from consciousness.” This argument posits that the presence of finite, irreducible consciousness in humans is best explained by the existence of a divine being.

Core Premises of the Argument

Moreland’s argument is structured deductively and can be outlined as follows:

1. Existence of Non-Physical Mental States: Mental states are genuine non-physical entities that exist.
2. Correlation Between Mental and Physical States: Specific mental and physical event types are regularly correlated.
3. Necessity of an Explanation: There must be an explanation for these correlations.
4. Types of Explanations: Explanations can be either personal (attributing events to the intentions of a conscious agent) or natural scientific (attributing events to physical laws and processes).
5. Inadequacy of Scientific Explanation: Natural scientific explanations are insufficient to account for the correlation between mental and physical states.
6. Conclusion of Personal Explanation: Therefore, a personal explanation is required, which Moreland identifies as theistic.

This formulation suggests that the regular correlations between mental and physical states cannot be fully accounted for by natural scientific explanations alone, thereby implying the necessity of a theistic explanation.

Wikipedia

Defense Against Physicalism

Moreland critiques physicalist perspectives that attempt to explain consciousness purely through physical processes. He argues that such approaches fail to account for the qualitative aspects of conscious experience, known as qualia, and the intentionality of mental states—the aboutness or directedness toward objects or states of affairs. By emphasizing these features, Moreland contends that consciousness cannot be adequately explained within a naturalistic framework, thereby supporting the need for a theistic explanation.

Engagement with Alternative Theories

In his book “Consciousness and the Existence of God,” Moreland engages with and critiques various alternative explanations for consciousness, including:

• John Searle’s Contingent Correlation: The view that mental states are contingently correlated with brain states without a deeper explanation.
• Timothy O’Connor’s Emergent Necessitation: The idea that mental states emerge necessarily from complex physical systems.
• Colin McGinn’s Mysterian “Naturalism”: The position that human cognition is inherently limited, preventing us from understanding consciousness fully.
• David Skrbina’s Panpsychism: The belief that consciousness is a fundamental and ubiquitous aspect of reality.
• Philip Clayton’s Pluralistic Emergentist Monism: A perspective that combines elements of emergence and monism to explain consciousness.

Moreland concludes that these approaches are inadequate in explaining the origin and nature of consciousness, thereby reinforcing his argument for a theistic explanation.

Routledge

Conclusion

J.P. Moreland’s argument from consciousness offers a robust philosophical case for the existence of God, grounded in the unique characteristics of human consciousness. By systematically addressing and critiquing alternative naturalistic explanations, Moreland underscores the plausibility of theism as the most coherent account for the existence and nature of conscious experience.