The arguments Douglas Wilson presents are best answered by a philosophically informed capable cognitive neuroscientist or a scientifically informed, capable philosopher with broad knowledge in philosophy of mind and epistemology.

"Beauty" as an objective quality, ethical values as objectively existing - how ludicrous. But the statements about mentality being impossible in a universe as science describes it - I have destroyed those arguments more times than I can count.

He has no idea of science or the rigorous application of logic, science and philosophical reasoning - even though he has studied and apparently even taught some of this.

Take the comments of some of out posters here together and you have an absolute refutation of his arguments... and being someone who specializes exactly in the areas (how intentionality, mentality and consciousness arise in the universe as understood by science interpreted and analysed rationally by philosophy) concerned with the claims he makes, I can say he is definitely i)plainly wrong and ii)uninformed about the status of research pertaining to these questions... even though he can at times sound reasonable because he applies reason to subtly false premises - retroactive rationalization of ludicrous mythology.


Btw, Hitchens ALWAYS abuses the word "solipsism". He uses it to mean "egocentrism", whereas it is actually the position that only one's own mind exists - he should know that.