.

Here’s a light list of 3 conclusions I have come to about reality when I start from science:

.

   (1)  Mind preceded matter.

.

For more use the DOOR.

.

[MORE]

.

   Since my list is short I’ll start over:

.

   (1)  Mind preceded matter.

   Or to say it differently: Mind existed sequentially before any matter or energy. Notice I¹ didn’t use the word “time.” Oxford philosopher Keith Ward has discussed this over and over, and the first book of his that comes to mind is More Than Matter. From my position in the second or third ranks of understanding science (my PhD is in science education), I’ve become impressed by the repeated observations that simple matter (mentioned in my third point) simply cannot accidentally and randomly “knock around” and become the person writing this paragraph even given billions of years. My simple looks through the front doors of small particle physics and neuroscience research, for example, as well as what I see looking back back me from the mirror rule this out.

   Without going into more detail, something’s going on within us and outside of us, and has gone on before us that humans call, for the lack of a better word, work of a mind.

.

   (2)  Time, matter, and energy began many, many years ago.

   An enormous amount of data in astrophysics and geoscience suggest that billions of years lie behind us. This comes by observing and measuring with many tools and devices the stars above and the Earth under our feet, and then interpreting in logical ways what we see. If the years are much less, or only a few thousand, then there is no widely agreed-upon known scientific information to support this.

.

   (3)  Over time, the “arrangement” of much matter has changed dramatically from simpler into more complex forms.

   The odyssey of matter, driven by energy, from quark to atom to inorganic molecules, to organic molecules, to cell and single-celled organisms and organic tissues, to organs, to simple plants and animals, to small plants and animals, to giant pine trees and the people cutting them down with power tools they have designed–all this–is nothing short of miraculous. Small changes in complexity in inorganic and organic material have been clearly demonstrated by science as well as animal breeding, and the modifying of genetic information (by human tampering . But many larger natural, “on-their-own” changes in the complexity of plants and animals over time, and the causes for such large changes have been assumed, but never demonstrated scientifically.

   Consider the necessary causes of what seems like step-by-step building of hereditary human DNA (that has now been mapped!) and the illusive neuronal activity in the brain that occurs when a person “thinks.” There are 3 possible explanations for the existence of these: (a) The features and processes like these always existed that way. (b) They were a result of repeated random “accidents” (mutations) that not only occurred but were preserved over millions of years. (c) They were created and preserved by a Mind outside of the dimensions of the natural world that scientific research gives us access to².

.

   To me, these assumptions, while not scientifically provable, are logically reasonable.

__________________________________________________________

   ¹ Note the switch from the editorial “we” to “I,” the first person. This is a quick summary of my thoughts that I’ll probably modify somewhat in days to come.

   ² Note two things here:  (1) The word “evolution” is never used, mainly because it is rarely defined and becomes a pawn in shell game where nothing gets solved. “Theistic evolution,” “micro- and macro-evolution” and other alternatives to “naturalistic with-no-supernatural-interference evolution,” which means different things to people is not the subject of discussion here. (2) The “old age, billions of years” interpretation is necessary for “naturalistic (atheistic, if you will) evolutionary” interpretation, but in no way does it demand a naturalistic evolutionary interpretation. Many old-earth creationists reject naturalistic evolution because of so many gaps in the “necessary” evidence. “Evolution” and “Age of the Universe” are separate issues.