Classical Theism, Philosophy, and Religion Forum / Naturalism

**Posted by am93** 11/14/2017 8:29 am

I have read a lot about the naturalistic account of the mind and i have some questions. When naturalists say the mind is just an outcome of biological processes in the brain, how can they then say that humans are rational when it's just random random neurons firing? For a person to make a rational choice there has to be a will to use reason? But if i understand correctly naturalists don't think the will exists so how can rationality exist?

Last edited by am93 (11/14/2017 6:42 pm)

**Posted by seigneur** 11/14/2017 9:27 am

am93 wrote:
When naturalists say the mind is just an outcome of biological processes in the brain, how can they then say that humans are rational when it's just random random neurons firing?

To be fair, I have not seen naturalists claiming to support rationalism in this way. Rather, they assert that neurons firing is all there is to mental activity. It's not that this (alleged) fact is rational or makes sense of the world as we know, it's just that it's (allagedly) scientific. There's no explicit claim to rationality here, but an implicit equivocation of science and reason.

**Posted by am93** 11/14/2017 10:35 am

seigneur wrote:
am93 wrote:
When naturalists say the mind is just an outcome of biological processes in the brain, how can they then say that humans are rational when it's just random random neurons firing?
To be fair, I have not seen naturalists claiming to support rationalism in this way. Rather, they assert that neurons firing is all there is to mental activity. It's not that this (alleged) fact is rational or makes sense of the world as we know, it's just that it's (allagedly) scientific. There's no explicit claim to rationality here, but an implicit equivocation of science and reason.

I understand better now, thank you.