NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

Reply to thread

Message

I think a good case could be made for tightening it down. But before we get too far into that, you also mentioned that we weren't necessarily intending on getting into religion and God specifically. Not that I'm not OK talking about it, but it's been more because of your mention of Plantinga that led us here. It piqued my interest because of the scholarly approach, and your mention of this "model" that we can use to assess experience also sounds interesting. I thought that perhaps you were more familiar with both and had a particular point of view that was larger than the points you mentioned. Is there anything along these lines that you'd like to expand on?

While you're thinking about that, I'll quickly comment that the model of experience that I currently relate to has to do with the nature of objective and subjective experience ( duality ), the former fed by stimulus responses which are fairly well understood by science, and the former that deals with the nature of consciousness, which we've been discussing a lot in other threads recently.

<blockquote data-quote="Randall" data-source="post: 173350" data-attributes="member: 2682">I think a good case could be made for tightening it down. But before we get too far into that, you also mentioned that we weren&#039;t necessarily intending on getting into religion and God specifically. Not that I&#039;m not OK talking about it, but it&#039;s been more because of your mention of Plantinga that led us here. It piqued my interest because of the scholarly approach, and your mention of this &quot;model&quot; that we can use to assess experience also sounds interesting. I thought that perhaps you were more familiar with both and had a particular point of view that was larger than the points you mentioned. Is there anything along these lines that you&#039;d like to expand on?&nbsp;While you&#039;re thinking about that, I&#039;ll quickly comment that the model of experience that I currently relate to has to do with the nature of objective and subjective experience ( duality ), the former fed by stimulus responses which are fairly well understood by science, and the former that deals with the nature of consciousness, which we&#039;ve been discussing a lot in other threads recently.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Randall, post: 173350, member: 2682"] [FONT=Arial][SIZE=4]I think a good case could be made for tightening it down. But before we get too far into that, you also mentioned that we weren't necessarily intending on getting into religion and God specifically. Not that I'm not OK talking about it, but it's been more because of your mention of Plantinga that led us here. It piqued my interest because of the scholarly approach, and your mention of this "model" that we can use to assess experience also sounds interesting. I thought that perhaps you were more familiar with both and had a particular point of view that was larger than the points you mentioned. Is there anything along these lines that you'd like to expand on? While you're thinking about that, I'll quickly comment that the model of experience that I currently relate to has to do with the nature of objective and subjective experience ( duality ), the former fed by stimulus responses which are fairly well understood by science, and the former that deals with the nature of consciousness, which we've been discussing a lot in other threads recently.[/SIZE][/FONT] [/QUOTE]

Verification