Searching for GOD...

[Stranger]

My choice is determined by my conscious will at the time I make the choice.

Which says what not how. Have you really forgotten the endless times we've been over this?

Your scenario seems to presume that our conscious will is entirely predetermined by previous chains of cause and effect with no definitive causal event...

The term "definitive causal event" is just more word salad. Either we make choices entirely because of what led to them (all the circumstances and our nature, nurture and experience) or not. This is a binary choice (X or not X), it has to be one or the other - there are no other options. If our choices are not entirely because of what led to them, then, to the extent they are not, they must be for no reason (random).

...which renders no possibility for the conscious freedom we all enjoy.

Nonsense - this is about how our mind works, not whether it does what we all experience or not.

[Roses]

I don't see much point in this thread as it is going nowhere, the repetitions go on and on.

[Alan Burns]

Torri,

You can if you think "magic" is a sensible explanation for something. You can also have round triangles, tap dancing unicorns and Boris Johnson with a moral compass though so I'm not sure that helps him at all.

Magic is an illusion,  but my conscious freedom to compose this post is no illusion.

[Alan Burns]

The term "definitive causal event" is just more word salad. Either we make choices entirely because of what led to them (all the circumstances and our nature, nurture and experience) or not. This is a binary choice (X or not X), it has to be one or the other - there are no other options. If our choices are not entirely because of what led to them, then, to the extent they are not, they must be for no reason (random).

I have no doubt that a conscious choice is invoked by a definitive causal event - otherwise it is not a choice, just a reaction.  You continually ignore the fact that our choices are invoked by our present state of mind - not the past.  Choices are not reactions, and they are certainly not random.

[Alan Burns]

Nonsense - this is about how our mind works, not whether it does what we all experience or not.

But by consciously choosing to write this statement, you are aptly demonstrating the freedom you declare to be nonsense.

[torridon]

I have no doubt that a conscious choice is invoked by a definitive causal event - otherwise it is not a choice, just a reaction.  You continually ignore the fact that our choices are invoked by our present state of mind - not the past.  Choices are not reactions, and they are certainly not random.

And our present state of mind is a consequence of the things that gave rise to it.  I mean, really, what is so hard to understand about this ?  If your current state of mind is not consequent to the things that gave rise to it, then your mind must be full of random thoughts.  If your present state of mind is to prefer the tea over the coffee, then either there must be a reason for that, or there isn't, in which case your choice is random.

[torridon]

But by consciously choosing to write this statement, you are aptly demonstrating the freedom you declare to be nonsense.

Nope, the freedom demonstrated is that no one and no thing prevented Stranger from writing his post.

[Stranger]

Magic is an illusion,  but my conscious freedom to compose this post is no illusion.

But by consciously choosing to write this statement, you are aptly demonstrating the freedom you declare to be nonsense.

Seriously Alan, how many more times do you need it pointing out that people choosing to do as they wish demonstrates exactly nothing that anybody is disputing?

I have no doubt that a conscious choice is invoked by a definitive causal event - otherwise it is not a choice, just a reaction.

Choices obviously are reactions and "definitive causal event" is still word salad. What do you think it means?

You continually ignore the fact that our choices are invoked by our present state of mind - not the past.

And our present state of mind is either entirely due to what led to it or it isn't, in which case some part of it is random.

Choices are not reactions, and they are certainly not random.

Of course choices are reactions and if they aren't entirely due to what led up to them, they are, to some extent, due to nothing that led to them and therefore, to that extent, random.

This is simple logic and repeating silly evidence- and reasoning-free assertions and meaningless phrases doesn't address it.

[Alan Burns]

Choices obviously are reactions and "definitive causal event" is still word salad. What do you think it means?

Choices and reactions are two different words with two different meanings.  One is unavoidable, the other is entirely up to you.

[Gordon]

Choices and reactions are two different words with two different meanings.  One is unavoidable, the other is entirely up to you.

If a choice is a reaction to a set of circumstances, and if at the end of the day you end up making a specific choice, then surely that choice is unavoidable - since after consideration of all the details, and the influence of your personal traits (some of which you may not be consciously aware of) and previous experiences, you end up choosing the particular option that is the unavoidable result of your reaction to the presenting circumstances - and even if you change your mind later that too would be unavoidable, since it would only mean your choosing was incomplete earlier and needed revision.

Choices seem much like a considered reactions, but even then there are aspects of the process, such as your biases and how your brain processes the relevant information in relation to previous experiences that you may be consciously unaware of but do determine your conclusion even if it feels like the choice is all yours via deliberation alone. 

[torridon]

Choices and reactions are two different words with two different meanings.  One is unavoidable, the other is entirely up to you.

So why do different people make different choices given the same options ?

[Stranger]

Choices and reactions are two different words with two different meanings.  One is unavoidable, the other is entirely up to you.

You do love your false dichotomies, don't you? There is no reason why something can't be both "entirely up to you" and also inevitable - at least in the sense you keep on using the word inevitable, to apply to anything at all that is the result of causal chains.

But of course a choice is a reaction, it's a reaction to the circumstance at hand. You don't just make choices randomly about nothing, do you?

And you ignored the logic - yet again.     

[Alan Burns]

"definitive causal event" is still word salad. What do you think it means?

It is the event, or events which drive our thought processes.  Such events are responsible for freeing us from the otherwise predetermined chains of physical cause and effect to allow our conscious freedom to think -  a freedom which is unique to the human race.  A freedom which can't be sourced from within the predetermined chain reactions of material elements

[Alan Burns]

And our present state of mind is a consequence of the things that gave rise to it.  I mean, really, what is so hard to understand about this ?  If your current state of mind is not consequent to the things that gave rise to it, then your mind must be full of random thoughts.  If your present state of mind is to prefer the tea over the coffee, then either there must be a reason for that, or there isn't, in which case your choice is random.

But you constantly ignore the obvious freedom we have to drive our own thought processes within our current state of mind.  This freedom goes far beyond the trivial choice between tea or coffee.  It is the essential driving force behind all human creativity and discovery.  Could Darwin have come up with his theory if all his thoughts were predetermined before he became aware of them?  Could any religious belief exist if we did not have the freedom to consciously contemplate the reality of our own existence?

[Stranger]

It is the event, or events which drive our thought processes.

Well, either these events are entirely due to their antecedent events or not. If not, then they must be partly due to nothing (random).

Such events are responsible for freeing us from the otherwise predetermined chains of physical cause and effect...

Physical has nothing to do with it. The only way for an event to be free from causes (break out of cause and effect) is for it to be (partly) causeless (random).

...to allow our conscious freedom to think -  a freedom which is unique to the human race.  A freedom which can't be sourced from within the predetermined chain reactions of material elements

Blind faith assertions.

[Stranger]

But you constantly ignore the obvious freedom we have to drive our own thought processes within our current state of mind.

Saying something is "obvious" doesn't make it true, or in this case, even make it make sense - this is still gibberish.

You constantly ignore the logic that totally undermines your position.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Magic is an illusion,...

You're thinking of conjuring tricks. "Magic" also though means stories like Snow White & the Seven Dwarves, Sleeping Beauty etc. Your claims and assertions are epistemically identical to such stories - no definition, no logic and no evidence. "Soul" and "Pinocchio" are identical for this purpose.   

... but my conscious freedom to compose this post is no illusion.

Actually "illusion" is quite a good description for it - it feels for all the world as though we have some sort of decision-making agency independent of the vast processes under the bonnet we're not consciously aware of, but even a cursory examination of the assumption that the experience of consciousness must also be the explanation for it will tell you that the assumption must be false. Sadly you seem to be forever stuck in the rut of, "it feels that way, therefore it must be that way" without ever having the honesty to address the arguments that falsify you.     

[Alan Burns]

Well, either these events are entirely due to their antecedent events or not. If not, then they must be partly due to nothing (random).

You consistently fail to acknowledge the nature and power of human will.  I know you deem it to be illogical, but that does not change reality.

Physical has nothing to do with it. The only way for an event to be free from causes (break out of cause and effect) is for it to be (partly) causeless (random).

And in this you appear to presume that the spiritual nature of our conscious human soul is subject to the same mechanistic chains of cause and effect as material entities.  You have the power to generate whatever is needed to invoke an act of will.  Your conscious will is the definitive cause of your choice.

[Alan Burns]

   

Actually "illusion" is quite a good description for it - it feels for all the world as though we have some sort of decision-making agency independent of the vast processes under the bonnet we're not consciously aware of, but even a cursory examination of the assumption that the experience of consciousness must also be the explanation for it will tell you that the assumption must be false. Sadly you seem to be forever stuck in the rut of, "it feels that way, therefore it must be that way" without ever having the honesty to address the arguments that falsify you.     

But you do not know what comprises our conscious awareness, or our conscious experiences, or what is physically implied by "a cursory examination of the assumption that the experience", or how this can lead to a conclusion "that the assumption must be false."  In essence you put a lot of unjustifiable faith in the thought processes which you deem to be predetermined before you are consciously aware of them.

If you can deem a conscious choice to be an illusion, why not a conscious conclusion too?

[torridon]

But you constantly ignore the obvious freedom we have to drive our own thought processes within our current state of mind.  This freedom goes far beyond the trivial choice between tea or coffee.  It is the essential driving force behind all human creativity and discovery.  Could Darwin have come up with his theory if all his thoughts were predetermined before he became aware of them?  Could any religious belief exist if we did not have the freedom to consciously contemplate the reality of our own existence?

Oh, deary me, you really just aren't getting this. Our thoughts are consequences of the things that gave rise to them.  We cannot have a thought arising out of nowhere being the 'driving' force because if that were the case, them those thoughts would be random.  I don't think my thoughts are random and I can see they derive from prior things.  Your way of understanding mind function is back to front, as if effect leads to cause.  Our minds are continually processing inputs leading to responses, there is a continual flow going on and the choices we make are in the midst of that flow.  There is no way that a decision making facility could stand apart from that flow, as if somehow independent of it, it is part of it.  In reality, we cannot choose which thought to think next, as that itself is a thought process.  All our thoughts and choices must be consequences of the inputs that led to them otherwise minds would be random machines that would be a debilitating curse to a minded body. 

I'm sure like me you must have heard on the news of some extraordinary crime committed and the question everyone immediately asks is, why did he do it ?  This reflects that deep down, we all understand that there are reasons for things, and no thought, no action, no choice ever arises out of nowhere in a vacuum, they always arise for reasons.

[Stranger]

You consistently fail to acknowledge the nature and power of human will.  I know you deem it to be illogical, but that does not change reality.

It is actually you who is ignoring the logic, the evidence, and even the actual experience here and trying to substitute your impossible nonsense version of "freedom" that not only doesn't match logic, evidence, and experience, but doesn't even make coherent sense.

Not only is what you saying logically impossible, it is so absurd that it isn't even possible to imagine what things would be like if it were true. It is exactly as absurd as a triangular circle.

And in this you appear to presume that the spiritual nature of our conscious human soul is subject to the same mechanistic chains of cause and effect as material entities.

I am only assuming logic. There is no such thing as mechanistic chains of cause and effect, there is just cause and effect - and a process that happens over time (such as thinking about something and making a choice) is either due to cause and effect only, or part of it isn't and is therefore random.

You have the power to generate whatever is needed to invoke an act of will.  Your conscious will is the definitive cause of your choice.

There's the triangular circle again. My will isn't the cause, my will is the result of things that happened that led to it - otherwise it couldn't possibly be my will. I have got to be the person I am because of my nature, nurture and experience. If my will was magically able to be "free" from that, it would no longer be mine.

[Alan Burns]

There's the triangular circle again. My will isn't the cause, my will is the result of things that happened that led to it - otherwise it couldn't possibly be my will. I have got to be the person I am because of my nature, nurture and experience. If my will was magically able to be "free" from that, it would no longer be mine.

If you will is entirely predetermined by events beyond your control, it most certainly is not your will. 

[Stranger]

If you will is entirely predetermined by events beyond your control, it most certainly is not your will.

It can't be my will unless it is determined by me - and I got to be me because of reasons.

No matter how much you dislike it and how much it threatens your faith, there is no alternative to this, other than randomness. If something isn't entirely determined by what led to it, then it must, in part, not be due to anything that led to it (random).

[torridon]

If you will is entirely predetermined by events beyond your control, it most certainly is not your will.

Why not ?  If my will is to punch Harry on the nose as a result of him having called my mother a whore 2 seconds previously, it is still my will despite that it is a consequence of the causal event that gave rise to it.  Whose will do you imagine it could be ?

[Alan Burns]

Why not ?  If my will is to punch Harry on the nose as a result of him having called my mother a whore 2 seconds previously, it is still my will despite that it is a consequence of the causal event that gave rise to it.  Whose will do you imagine it could be ?

If you read my post correctly, you would recall that I said it would not be your will if you had no control over the events which determine such a choice.  Surely you would accept that you have control over whether or not you throw the punch, so if you choose to throw it it is your will, your choice.