My comments to
The Fisheye Lens Effect of Phenomenology
“But we don’t know of any consciousness that doesn’t emerge from neural activity and we don’t know of any intelligence that doesn’t emerge from the physical processing of information.”
Right now I listen to lectures by Maarten Hoenen on Ancient Greek and Middle Ages European philosophy. I have listened today to the lecture about Saint Anselm of Canterbury.
The research program of that time was as follows. The Lord is rational and He has created a rational world. He has also created a human being in such a way that he/she can comprehend the created world. In other words, the world is intelligible.
Hence take the Bible. It cannot be false. Hence you need to develop your reason to understand it. Maarten Hoenen compares it with the process of learning math. You have exercises with the answers and you need to learn math in such a way to get the right answers. If your answers do not match the answers in the textbook, it is your fault, you have forgotten something when doing your exercise. As a result, if you train you mind good enough, you will see that you can rationally explain everything what is written in the Bible.
If you change the Lord to the Laws of Nature and the Bible to modern science textbooks (say Grand Design by Hawking), then you get the modern research program. Well, it is not completely clear nowadays why the Laws of Nature that have created a human being have allowed him/her to comprehend the Laws of Nature. I guess, the intelligibility of the Laws of Nature it taken a priori just by inertia from the Christianity doctrine.
Anyway I believe that this explains how such a sentence comes to life and what kind of a logic is behind it.