Pragmatic,

Once again, you brush over monumental and important things and focus on trivial matters. Morality and the meaning of life have everything to do with cosmology, because if you get cosmology wrong, then it leads to bad morality and misunderstandings about the meaning of life. The reason why you didn't address anything I wrote about these subjects is because you know that my arguments were sound and on point. But as you like to do, you bring up irrelevant things and say - "That is a Red Herring fallacy in the form Appeal to Fear and Wishful Thinking, " which translated means blah, blah, blah, blah! Focus on the arguments and where they lead to. Open up your mind and expand your thought process. Respond to me by showing where my arguments go off the beaten path of logic and reason.

A premise is a proposition that is set before as an explanation. A proposition is a statement that affirms or denies something and is either true or false. What I have proposed? That an eternal mind is responsible for our universe and everything therein. How did I reach this conclusion? Look carefully and listen Pragmatic! By examining the properties of nature which exhibit order, synergy, complexity, and fine-tuning skills, these properties (according to reality, experience, and logic; hence, pragmatism), are the result of mind (intelligence). If not, then show me from reality, experience, and logic, what could be responsible for these properties. Hence, my logical deduction (CONCLUSION) AFFIRMS my premise, my proposition! It is you who doesn't know what he is talking about. You really need to listen and consider more, before you start blabbing away.

It is I who has answered everything you've asked. The problem is, you don't like the answers I've given because of your bias and close-mindedness. It is you who haven't answered any of my questions and have given as a response, "I'm not interested in that!" What??!! Dude, something is terribly wrong with the way you think. As I mentioned before, with great ferocity you want to quickly discount my argument, but you give nothing in return. That's foolishness.

Oh to the contrary Pragmatic, quantum mechanics is getting closer to validate metaphysical claims. You better do your homework in this science. The Higgs Boson discovery (2013) revealed that everything is made of fields (Higgs field), not particles. And according to Sean Carrol, the fields are not anything physical, but vibrations of some type of energy that "miraculously" (a word used by physicist Sean Carrol) gives rise to particles. What is this energy? This can be debated, but this still doesn't negate my premise which is grounded in classical physics which says that we live an orderly and lawful world. You better wake up and smell the coffee!

Any claim that is made by any religious entity, guru, priest, or person, has to be met with some type of skepticism and be proven true with logic, reason, and common sense. So if someone tells me reincarnation is the way of life, I would first ask what is it and why they believe this to be true. After they give their explanation of it, I must mediate upon the information to make sure it makes sense. And if they tell me that they received it from a holy book, then it is my responsibility to study that book holistically. And if in my studies I come across things that defy logic, reason, and common sense, then I quickly discard it. The doctrine of reincarnation states that a soul is born multiple times into new bodies or life forms in order to serve out karma from previous lives. What this doctrine teaches is you are given many chances to get your life right until you reach the state of nirvana (perfection). This teaching is illogical, because it suggests that one could live anyway he chooses and if he so happens to get it wrong, then he has an eternal lifetime to get it right. But what reality teaches is, the choices you make now have repercussions now and later. In other words, man lives once, and in that life he has been blessed with, we have to live right and moral, or else face the Creator who made us and give an account for the things we have done in our body. This makes perfect sense in the logic of justice. You're not given chances after death, death is the end and in the end we give a reckoning of what we've done.
Other gods in other religions don't meet the criteria of logic, reason, and common sense. The tooth fairy and Sandman are figments of people's imagination. Elvis is dead and gone.
People's "deluded" reality and experience is what is responsible for these fallacious claims.

Pragmatic, I don't know what you want from me. I've been as clear and lucid as I could possibly be. Once again, in cosmology, no one was there in the beginning; hence, we are all making assumptions as to how things began. We work from the KNOWN WORLD to the UNKNOWN beginning. We're working backwards like a detective trying to figure out a crime scene. I get that atheists believe in the BIG BANG and EVOLUTION, but by point has been - show how those assumptions are LOGICALLY accurate. Show how they make sense. How does organic matter know intuitively to form itself with great precision to form the only life we know exists - our universe and life within? How does organic matter give rise to the hard problem of consciousness? This endeavor is purely logical!

LOL.... Let's see who has the greater "leap of faith." Atheism: Organic matter, intuitively and randomly, gave us the recipe for life - order, synergy, complexity, and fine-tuning. While I'm asserting that from mind (intelligence) come these properties. Ya, who sounds like the rational and sane one? Who has the "gigantic hole"?

And your assertion that "I don't think you can even come to proving your assertion that properties of nature are consistent with processes of mind" is countered by what? You are negating this, so the onus is on you to show why this can't be. What is gives us order, synergy, complexity, and fine-tuning? Randomness, chance..... Out of all the precise things that needed to happen in order for life to exist, the atheist says, it happen by chance. Now that it purely ridiculous, because nothing in reality and experience teaches us that randomness and chance produces order, complexity, synergy, and fine-tuning. Throw some scrap metal together and give it "billions of years" and it will form a helicopter. You want me to believe that? That's foolishness!

****ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS (which I always provide):
1. Similarity to what? You have to provide something else that could give us these properties for a comparison to be made. We are rational beings and as such, you must provide an alternative rational suggestion.
2. Mind (intelligence) is the only known entity (pragmatism) that gives us order, synergy, complexity, and fine-tuning. If not, what else?
3. A mind is always consistent with the processes of mind, that's what a mind does.
4. I've never advocated for "one" mind theory. I've only mentioned that mind (intelligence) is responsible for our universe.
5. What reality and experience teaches us is, there is always a FIRST in a series. If not, then you would have to give a logical suggestion as to what could have always been here. If you're going to argue who created that being, then we can go on forever with that argument. The buck must stop somewhere!
6. If there is a FIRST in a series and matter reveals that it has been created, then logically we must conclude that Whoever or Whatever made matter must be eternal. If not, then we come back to answer 5 and we go infinity with no conclusion in sight. Either mind is eternal or matter is eternal. Which is it?
7. I don't know if there were something else before us, could possibly have been, but that is not what we are arguing over. Im arguing over Who or What made us. I could care less if there was something before us. I care about now (the present).