Please explain how pure naturalism(as opposed to some theistic alternative) can explain the development of both human reason and human consciousness.
If, as naturalism claims, the reasoning of the human mind is merely the product of the movement of atoms and electrons, then we have no reason to believe any of our reasoning is true. Moreover, what mechanism would cause this naturalistic phenomenon to realize it even exists?
Moreover, what naturalistic process would allow a person to, by mere will, manipulate this electronic/material process of thought, to direct where his mind goes? One can argue that this ability is an illusion, but if it is an illusion, then we have no reason to believe in any of our ideas or scientific observations, naturalistic or theistic.
This is one of many phenomena that is not yet fully understood -- which does not mean that it is inexplicable, only that we don't yet know. The best thinking about this, to my knowledge, is that it's the result of something called Emergence.
If, as naturalism claims, the reasoning of the human mind is merely the product of the movement of atoms and electrons, then we have no reason to believe any of our reasoning is true.
Nor would we have any reason to be confident if a supernatural agency were responsible. The only reason for confidence in our ability to reason is its demonstrated effectiveness in the natural world. That's what science is all about.
Sounds like the standard creationist handbook. Make a "science-like" statement, get called on it, change the subject.
To address your statements. Is "will" a scientific concept? Do animals display this property of "will"? If they do, do they have souls? If animals have souls, are we wrong to treat them any differently than ourselves?
Merely the movement of atoms and electrons? As opposed to what? Ectoplasm in motion?
We are patterns in motion whether these patterns are instantiated in some supernatural stuff or mere matter. Thus I don't see why the one should be more reliable than the other.