Searching for GOD...

[Alan Burns]

It is your own contrived invention, Alan - all this 'soul = awareness' nonsense is just the fallacious narrative you've created in order to manufacture a 'gap' so as to insert your particular formulation of 'God' into.

No matter how complex the human brain is, it is still comprised of atoms and molecules which in themselves just react to their immediate environment.  The phrase "emergent property" is not a feasible explanation for the awareness humans have for their own existence.

[Maeght]

My awareness, based on my prior experiences on this and other threads, tells me there is no point in posting any further replies to your constant stream of assertions Alan so will drop out of this now. I thought for a moment that you were moving towards a position where you were at least considering that free will may be an illusion but now you have reverted back to you standard line we would just go round and round the same discussion again and again and that would just be a waste of time for us both. I'll leave it to others who may be happier to persevere.

[torridon]

I could program animal like reactions to visual patterns and other data obtained from the sensory organs. The reactions animals have to such data do not constitute proof that they have the same conscious awareness as humans.

Pay attention Alan, noone claims other animals have the same conscious awareness as humans, noone is talking about proof. What we can talk about is reasonable inference from available evidence, and the evidence suggests that all vertebrates have some form of conscious awareness, it is ubiquitous in the animal kingdom.  That certainly doesn't mean that it is exactly the same across all species, nor even is it the same between individuals of the same species. As an example of that perhaps you might recall the dress that broke the internet earlier this year, it highlights the diversity in conscious visual perception between individuals; what colours do you in this dress ? I see blue and brown, although others experience it as white and gold, whereas it was actually blue and black :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dress_(viral_phenomenon)#/media/File:The_Dress_(viral_phenomenon).png

[torridon]

As I said in my post, we have a free choice as to which purpose we wish to fulfill.

and that sentence demonstrates yet again the circularity of your position.  If you have a number of 'purposes' from which to choose one to fulfill, the one that you choose is determined by your uppermost desire in the matter.  Our choice is the manifestation of our desire but we cannot choose which desires to have, they form within us. 'Will' is not some primal force of nature, like strong nuclear, it is a consequence that manifests at the level of animal behaviours; and at a deeper conceptual level it is a nonsense  to talk of choice as being free, a choice by definition is something that serves a purpose and hence cannot be free. A choice has to be made on some basis, or else it is random; if it is made on some basis then it is not free, it is a consequence.

[Outrider]

The desire to do something is certainly influenced by our built in instincts and learnt experiences.  The decision to implement a desire (or not) is a conscious action which to me has no feasible explanation in terms of deterministic chemical acitivity in the brain.  The decision to turn desire into action is like the spiritual flick of a switch in the brain which can be operated by the human soul.

Right. And how does the soul decide whether to flick the switch or not? Not the mechanics, but the process of information.

O.

[torridon]

No matter how complex the human brain is, it is still comprised of atoms and molecules which in themselves just react to their immediate environment.  The phrase "emergent property" is not a feasible explanation for the awareness humans have for their own existence.

Why not ?

[Alan Burns]

Right. And how does the soul decide whether to flick the switch or not? Not the mechanics, but the process of information.

O.

The decision when to flick the switch is simply a combination of conscious awareness and free will, which is the driving force behind all human creativity and artistic expression which goes far beyond the animal logic derived from instinct and learnt experience.

[Outrider]

The decision when to flick the switch is simply a combination of conscious awareness and free will, which is the driving force behind all human creativity and artistic expression which goes far beyond the animal logic derived from instinct and learnt experience.

You're trying to use free will to justify free will, that's not going to work.

What's the process of information going on in this 'free will' decision?

O.

[Alan Burns]

at a deeper conceptual level it is a nonsense  to talk of choice as being free, a choice by definition is something that serves a purpose and hence cannot be free. A choice has to be made on some basis, or else it is random; if it is made on some basis then it is not free, it is a consequence.

I think I would agree that a choice needs to be made on some basis.  The basis behind a free will decision is simply the conscious will of the person.  I suppose it is ultimately driven by the free thought processes going on in the brain.  The issue then is what drives your thought processes?

[torridon]

I think I would agree that a choice needs to be made on some basis.  The basis behind a free will decision is simply the conscious will of the person.  I suppose it is ultimately driven by the free thought processes going on in the brain.  The issue then is what drives your thought processes?

so where do thoughts come from ? and what do they consist of ?

[Alan Burns]

My awareness, based on my prior experiences on this and other threads, tells me there is no point in posting any further replies to your constant stream of assertions Alan so will drop out of this now. I thought for a moment that you were moving towards a position where you were at least considering that free will may be an illusion but now you have reverted back to you standard line we would just go round and round the same discussion again and again and that would just be a waste of time for us both. I'll leave it to others who may be happier to persevere.

Sorry I could not convince you, but many thanks for the interesting exchanges. 

[Alan Burns]

so where do thoughts come from ? and what do they consist of ?

A big question.
I know thoughts can generate brain activity, but there is a question over how this brain activity can be interpreted as conscious thought.

[torridon]

so where do thoughts come from ? and what do they consist of ?

A big question.
I know thoughts can generate brain activity, but there is a question over how this brain activity can be interpreted as conscious thought.

Here's some of my thoughts (sorry  ) on the matter.

First off, thoughts take many forms, so generalisations are going to be suspect.

Secondly, thoughts are brain activity, there can be no doubt about that.

Thirdly, any thought of whatever form has an origin; it doesn't come out of nowhere.  Quite often we can quite simply recognise that one thought triggers a subsequent thought; one thing leads to another. However quite often the causal origin of a thought is obscure to us, the reason being that novel thoughts emerge into conscious mind from lower levels of consciousness, picking up detail and form and definition as they rise from the nebulous emotion centres of the upper brain stem into higher cortical areas.

Fourthly, we don't consciously choose which thoughts to think. Thoughts happen to us. Just as we don't choose to shiver when we go out into the cold, thoughts occur to us, we don't consciously instantiate or create them.

Dreams are a form of thought; they are a form of conscious thought that happens while we are asleep, but as we are sleeping the mind is not applying it's normal level of reality checking that we associate with regular waking conscious states;  hence dreams are often unhinged, unconstrained.

All of this is consistent with a deterministic model of mind.  We do not make active choices in conscious mind, all thoughts emerge from lower levels, and all thoughts and choices are consequent to prior events and conditions. 

[Alan Burns]

Here's some of my thoughts (sorry  ) on the matter.

Interesting thoughts   

I would have to dispute the idea that thoughts come to your mind automatically.  My own perception is that when I am awake I can guide my thoughts any way I wish, whereas in dreams I have no apparent control.

In saying this I assume you will presume that the "I" mentioned above is just the pre determined behaviour of your brain cells, but my own perception is that "I" is my soul which perceives and controls my thought patterns.

[Outrider]

A big question.I know thoughts can generate brain activity, but there is a question over how this brain activity can be interpreted as conscious thought.

You think that thoughts can generate brain activity - presumably because of the strong correlation demonstrated by neurological experiments. However, how do you 'know' that thoughts cause brain activity rather than, say, brain activity causes thoughts or the possibility  that thoughts are the subjective experience of brain activity?

O.

[Alan Burns]

You think that thoughts can generate brain activity - presumably because of the strong correlation demonstrated by neurological experiments. However, how do you 'know' that thoughts cause brain activity rather than, say, brain activity causes thoughts or the possibility  that thoughts are the subjective experience of brain activity?

O.

Thoughts are different experiences to what we perceive through our senses.  There seems to be a different world of thought patterns within us built up from memories of past experiences and imagined future scenarios.  I can't begin to explain how these thought experiences translate to and from brain cell activity, but I just know that I am in contol of them.

[Alan Burns]

I keep coming back to the question of free will because I find it so hard to see why some people think it does not exist and must be an illusion.

Every day we are faced with choices between things which can be labelled right or wrong, good or evil.  The concepts of right, wrong, good and evil would not exist if we did not have the power to choose.  Then there are the feelings of guilt and regret when we know we have consciously made a bad choice when we know we could have made a better one.  Guilt and regret would not exist if we had no choice.  We also have a conscience which we can use to discern between good and bad deeds, and we have the power of free will to override or ignore our conscience.  Conscience would not exist if we had no free choice.  At the heart of all this is human awareness and our power to choose which is common to every healthy human being on this planet.  I know science shows that specific brain activity occurs prior to our awareness of making a conscious decision, but the true home of the human soul is the timeless dimension of Heaven, so the soul does not need to be restricted by the earthly dimension of time in order to invoke an act of free will in the human brain.

[Outrider]

Thoughts are different experiences to what we perceive through our senses.

Broadly, yes.

There seems to be a different world of thought patterns within us built up from memories of past experiences and imagined future scenarios.

Ok, thoughts based upon other thoughts.

I can't begin to explain how these thought experiences translate to and from brain cell activity, but I just know that I am in contol of them.

How do you know? You think you're in control of them, you believe you're in charge of them, but you don't 'know' that. Which still fails to answer the questions why do you think the 'you' that is in charge is not a property of that brain's activity, and regardless of that how do you think this 'you' is free of previous events without just become a random force?

O.

[Sebastian Toe]

the soul does not need to be restricted by the earthly dimension of time in order to invoke an act of free will in the human brain.

..care to expand on that?

[Alan Burns]

..care to expand on that?

The bible indicates that our soul is not part of this universe, because the soul is eternal, but our universe is not eternal.  So our soul must have a window into this universe by perceiving the activity of the human brain.  And in order to invoke acts of conscious free will which are not restricted by deterministic acitivity of the brain the soul must be able to invoke events in the brain which sets off the free will action.  If these events need to be invoked in advance of the action, the soul must be able to do this.

[torridon]

I keep coming back to the question of free will because I find it so hard to see why some people think it does not exist and must be an illusion.

Every day we are faced with choices between things which can be labelled right or wrong, good or evil.  The concepts of right, wrong, good and evil would not exist if we did not have the power to choose.  Then there are the feelings of guilt and regret when we know we have consciously made a bad choice when we know we could have made a better one.  Guilt and regret would not exist if we had no choice.  We also have a conscience which we can use to discern between good and bad deeds, and we have the power of free will to override or ignore our conscience.  Conscience would not exist if we had no free choice.  At the heart of all this is human awareness and our power to choose which is common to every healthy human being on this planet.  I know science shows that specific brain activity occurs prior to our awareness of making a conscious decision, but the true home of the human soul is the timeless dimension of Heaven, so the soul does not need to be restricted by the earthly dimension of time in order to invoke an act of free will in the human brain.

Our sense of shame, of guilt, our inner conscience, these things are evolutionary adaptations that help to keep our behaviours within certain tolerances. They are highly refined mechanisms in humans because we are an intensely social species, depending on mutual cooperation for survival so we have evolved an instinctive aversion for antisocial behaviours.  This speaks nothing to the free will debate; it is par for the course that nature operates this way, imbuing us over time with instinctive tendencies based on emotional responses that optimise our chances for survival.  Following birth of a child for instance, mother and baby bond forming intense loving attachments, not just because mother acts out of cold reasoned logic that the child needs care, but because both mother and child are flooded with the neuropeptide oxytocin creating intense instinctive feelings of love.  When hunters go out for a kill, they do so not merely out of reason, to find food, in fact most modern day hunters do not eat their kill anyway, they do so out of excitement, these feelings we have come courtesy of neurotransmitters dopamine and adrenalin, and again this is how behaviours evolve.  During the hundreds of millenia of the palaeolithic when humankind was refining its behavioural phenotype, noone would have stopped to argue about neurotransmitters or philosophical questions about will; all that mattered was that our behaviours were efficiently optimised for a social hominen group survival strategy, and we are still living with the dispositions fashioned in those long ago millenia.  Shall I go and beat up the old lady next door and take her life savings ?  Well, no, despite understanding the ultimately deterministic nature of mind, I won't do it because I will feel bad about it nonetheless, I would be miserable and I don't want that. We are emotional creatures acting on feelings more than logic, feelings that were millions of years in the making are not going to go away any time soon.

[Sebastian Toe]

The bible indicates that our soul is not part of this universe, because the soul is eternal, but our universe is not eternal.  So our soul must have a window into this universe by perceiving the activity of the human brain.  And in order to invoke acts of conscious free will which are not restricted by deterministic acitivity of the brain the soul must be able to invoke events in the brain which sets off the free will action.  If these events need to be invoked in advance of the action, the soul must be able to do this.

What has that got to do with being unrestricted with the earthly dimension of time though?

[SusanDoris]

Torridon #5853


Well said. Such a pity that AB will probably read it through a filter which will translate it into what he thinks the right answer should be.

[Leonard James]

Torridon #5853


Well said. Such a pity that AB will probably read it through a filter which will translate it into what he thinks the right answer should be.

Indeed! 

Sadly, Torri might as well address his perceptive posts to an ant, for all the impression it will make.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Indeed! 

Sadly, Torri might as well address his perceptive posts to an ant, for all the impression it will make.

What was that you were saying about ''Trolls''?