Is theism inherently mentalistic?

[MonDie]

The common approach seems to be shooting down natural explanations until it is taken for granted that no natural explanation will suffice. This appears to be a shortcut around the apparent problem that without an outlined natural mechanism, theism seems to explain anything and predicts nothing. Gods are not conceived as natural forces but as minds. However we seem to use mentalistic reasoning, wherein mental states have cause and effect power, to predict the bodily behavior of other people via what a psychiatrist calls "theory of mind". Given that gods are minds, mentalistic reasoning is probably necessary for theism to yield predictions.

 

Some people claim their gods communicate through ordinary experiences. The god, with special insight into the recipient's life, could communicate with a language only the recipient would understand, but I don't see why it should communicate in this manner exclusively.

 

The simulation hypothesis comes to mind, which some argue predicts that our universe will evidence computational constraints if scientists can look closely enough. Alas the simulation hypothesis only makes these predictions by going beyond the traditional mind-only creator.

Edited June 8, 2016 by MonDie

[Velocity_Boy]

Many (most?) atheist and even agnostic Anthropologists, Biolgists, and Psychiatrists will opine that the tendency to believe in some sort of supernatural entity is an undesirable by-product of the homo sapien sapien mind.

 

Our brains are postiviely obsessed with seeking patterns and causes in our world. Even when there are none to be found. The mind truly abhors a vacuum. (of causality!)

 

This tendency once served us very well back on the harsh and unforgiving African Savannah...........

 

"Hmm....deer seem to come to this place to drink after water comes from sky. They are easy to kill and eat when we find them here."

 

Voila!

 

But today, not so much. The brain looks for causes when there are none. For BIG and meaningful reasons.

 

This is why people are hesitant to admit that, say, a lonely and deranged angry little wannabe KGB informer can buy a mail-order rifle and take down a beloved American President. NO! They collectively cry! It had to be a Conspiracy!! THE CIA/KGB/Castro/Mafia did it!

 

The mind LOVES order. Patterns. This is why that most people, now matter how hard they try, are unable to generate on demand a sequence of totally random numbers. (We were put to this test once in an undergrad psych class I took.) You would be amazed at how difficult this is, as it seems as if it would be easy. Try it some time. I bet you will find a pattern. IF you DO do not feel bad, as last I checked only one our of about fifty can generate a totally random sequence that a computer cannot discern a pattern in.

 

I am going to try it now for fun. Anybody is welcome to try and find a pattern. I will not think long on this. I believe in our original test we had to do it on the spot, taking no longer than three minutes. (the numbers must be one or two digits).

 

 

7, 19, 23, 2, 0, 0, 88, 17, 93, 2, 4, 63, 9, 1, 12, 43, 72, 80, 12, 4, 20, 8, 4.

 

Hmm..looks pretty random! Anybody see a pattern? And yes, I did try my best to be as random as possible. Honest. I am not trying to make my point here.

[MonDie]

Okay, let us stop looking for patterns then. We're obviously doomed to find only false positives.

Of course belief of any kind is a byproduct of the brain.

[disarray]

MonDie

 

I have reread your opening paragraph several times and fail to see a clear statement as to what you are talking about (aka a thesis statement or question), even if I just try to make a wild guess. Do you know? If so, could you state it in one sentence, please?

[John Cuthber]

"Is theism inherently mentalistic"
Do you mean does it arise in the mind? if so I think the answer is yes, because it's difficult to see how it might arise in the liver or the elbow or whatever..

[Strange]

I thought mentalism was that branch of stage magic that dealt with "mind reading" tricks, etc.

[imatfaal]

If mentalistic is meant to pertain to mentalism - then perhaps the old usage is apposite "Mentalism is an ancient performing art in which the practitioner simulates supernatural mental powers."

 

xposted - damn

[MonDie]

Define mentalistic

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mentalistic

 

1

: of or relating to any school of psychology or psychiatry that in contrast to behaviorism values subjective data (as those gained by introspection) in the study and explanation of behavior

2

: of or relating to mental phenomena

 

Dr. Badcock likes to use it. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-imprinted-brain/201605/autistic-vs-psychotic-spectrums-overlapping-or-opposite

[Strange]

Then religion, like any other thought process or idea must be "mentalistic". Seems a fairly pointless question.

 

Is arithmetic mentalistic? Of course.

Is science mentalistic? Of course.

Is music mentalistic? Of course.

Is language mentalistic? Of course.

Is religion mentalistic? Of course.

Is reality mentalistic? Of course.

[MonDie]

 

Then religion, like any other thought process or idea must be "mentalistic". Seems a fairly pointless question.

 

Is arithmetic mentalistic? Of course.

Is science mentalistic? Of course.

Is music mentalistic? Of course.

Is language mentalistic? Of course.

Is religion mentalistic? Of course.

Is reality mentalistic? Of course.

 

I've vowed a one month break from the forum, but I wanted to propose a model of scientific thinking that can distinguish natural science from mentalistic science.

 

In natural science, the scientific mind can be described as occurring in three steps. In phase zero, there is the unconscious, pre-sensory phenomena that precedes the sensory input of phase one. In phase one, the raw sensory input is conscious but passively observed. Furthermore, it is usually visual or auditory input due to the requirement of quantifiability. In phase two, the content is conscious but involves active processing, namely active processing of the passive sensory input in an attempt to create a mental representation of the unconscious, pre-sensory phenomena. In phase three, motor output is used to conduct the experiment. The experiment is necessary to tease out cause and effect relationships from the otherwise purely correlational input.

Mentalistic science begins when we observe another potential agent with motor output like our own. This is when we can do processing on raw mental content other than sensory input in the formulation of a hypothesis. This is the only way we can predict the behavior of one another and test the hypothesis that other organisms are also conscious. This reasoning may be necessary for a test of theism, wherein the god is usually a mind rather than a physical force.

Edited June 17, 2016 by MonDie

[disarray]

MonDie....

And the problem with mentalistic claims is that the "raw mental content" cannot be shared with others, e.g., "do you see what I see?" or "Do you hear what i see?

 

Would you agree that science is inherently empirical (e.g., starts with sense-data that we can share between each other) whereas mentalistic phenomena are not (unless you want to include such things as mass sightings of UFOs or visions of Mother Mary, or whatever, which tend to be explained as being the result of preconceptions and thus mass interpretations, e.g., rumor that a light traveling noiselessly in the distance is a UFO.

 

Indeed, I had a friend years ago who took a group of people up on a hill and showed them a light in the distance that moved smoothly and silently through space. On the way up the hill he kept talking about how spaceships don't make a noise. Once on the hill we all did indeed see the light silently traveling across the sky, and, as might be expected, several people said, "Yes, I see the UFO too." No one at the time attempted to come up with alternative explanations such as that it was a commercial airplane coming in as per its regularly scheduled time, but just too far off for any of us to hear the noise (indeed, I suspect that the noise level of commercial airplanes has been reduced over the years).

Edited June 18, 2016 by disarray