Searching for GOD...

[Alan Burns]

It isn't science that is your problem, it's logic:

EITHER "every event is pre determined by scientifically defined laws"
OR every event is pre determined by some other laws of causation
OR some random element in addition to one of the above.

You can't have non-random and non-deterministic - even in your magic la la land fantasy world of the "non-physical".

It has nothing to do with science or the physical world - it's just logic.

I fully agree that all events must have a cause of some sort.  It is the nature of the cause of certain events in our brain which is in question.  The spiritual cause I have postulated allows the spiritual will of our conscious soul to interact and enable the control we perceive in our thoughts, words and actions.  To me this provides a more logical explanation of our reality than the illusion of free will suggested by those who have no spiritual beliefs.

[Alan Burns]

Alan,

I'm not "conceding" it, I'm just telling you where the reason and science leads to.

Flatly no, because you have no idea what you mean by "real" control. For reasons known only to yourself (but I suspect to prop up your religious beliefs) it seems to be important to you to assert some quality you call "real" and by which you actually mean in some unexplained way independent of cause and effect. As no such thing is required however in order for us to function with the everyday appearance of "free" will we can safely carry on acting as we do without that assumption being necessary at all.     

Not quite, but close enough for this purpose. Those "laws" may or may not be scientifically defined, but there's no evidence whatever to suggest that we possess (or are possessed by in your world?) little men at the controls who tell our bodies what to do, but who are also in some way independent both of our bodies and of the constraints of cause and effect.

It would mean no such thing - that a conjecture cannot as yet be explained "by current scientific knowledge" says nothing to the possibility of the "non physical". You're just trying a variant of the god of the gaps fallacy here. In any case, as such a conjecture has neither reason nor evidence to support it and the current state of scientific knowledge tells us that the universe is determinative despite any appearances to the contrary, fun as the speculation may be you have all your work ahead of you still to demonstrate that it's anything more than that.

Your replies seem to confirm the truth contained in Sassy's opening post on this thread:
"it is abundantly clear that people do not seek the truth regarding God but simply reasons to keep from believing in him."

[Nearly Sane]

Your replies seem to confirm the truth contained in Sassy's opening post on this thread:
"it is abundantly clear that people do not seek the truth regarding God but simply reasons to keep from believing in him."

which would mean that you think all atheists on here are lying.

[Gordon]

Your replies seem to confirm the truth contained in Sassy's opening post on this thread:
"it is abundantly clear that people do not seek the truth regarding God but simply reasons to keep from believing in him."

Congratulations Alan, for you've invented a new fallacy: the appeal to Sassology.

[Shaker]

Congratulations Alan, for you've invented a new fallacy: the appeal to Sassology.

As though he doesn't have enough already!

[Alan Burns]

which would mean that you think all atheists on here are lying.

I think it is more of a question of motivation.  If you really wanted to find God I think most people would find a way eventually.  I am aware that at least two prominent posters on here did want to find Him at one time, but sadly they seem to have given up on seeking Him.

[Stranger]

I fully agree that all events must have a cause of some sort.

Well, that's sort of progress... maybe...

It is the nature of the cause of certain events in our brain which is in question.

No, it isn't. Please try to concentrate! Our consciousness and free will is generated by something. You are claiming the brain can't do it and so it must be done elsewhere.

What you have not done is explained why elsewhere (the non-material) makes a difference. In order to do that, you need to explain how free will and consciousness is produced in this other realm and hence why it couldn't be produced by the material.

The spiritual cause I have postulated allows the spiritual will of our conscious soul to interact and enable the control we perceive in our thoughts, words and actions.

As I said, you've only moved the problem. It is now: how does the "spiritual will of our conscious soul" work and why does it need to be spiritual and not material?

To me this provides a more logical explanation of our reality than the illusion of free will suggested by those who have no spiritual beliefs.

You have spectacularly failed to produce any hint of logic at all.

[Alan Burns]

 ...   you need to explain how free will and consciousness is produced in this other realm and hence why it couldn't be produced by the material.

It is a fact that there is currently no scientific explanation for how conscious awareness can be generated from purely material elements, and the only material based "explanation" for free will is that it is not free will, but an illusion.

I admit that I do not know how conscious awareness and free will can work in the spiritual sense, but it does fit well with the religious concept of human beings having a spiritual soul, which is what I base my beliefs on.

[Stranger]

It is a fact that there is currently no scientific explanation for how conscious awareness can be generated from purely material elements...

That is not the same as saying that it can't be so generated.

...and the only material based "explanation" for free will is that it is not free will, but an illusion.

You just said that there wasn't such an explanation. There are logical (not material or scientific) constraints that means that free will, as many people think of it, is contradictory. I think the concept is valid, if made suitably realistic.

I admit that I do not know how conscious awareness and free will can work in the spiritual sense, but it does fit in with the religious concept of human beings having a spiritual soul, which is what I base my beliefs on.

So it isn't, after all, an argument for a soul; it isn't logically required, it's just your religious faith...

[Enki]

Three cheers for the irrational, the illogical and the spontaneous which allows such as joy and love to arise without the threat of it being sterilised out of existence by the aridity of reason, rationality and logic.

I can go along with you to some extent, Ekim, although I also think that the irrational, the illogical and the spontaneous can also lead to despair and hatred too. However if this thread was just about what makes us happy and harmonious people, then I have no problem at all. But it isn't, is it? As I see it, it is all about trying to establish if there is some sort of supernaturalism or there isn't, with one side attempting argument by personal credulity, which, in the absence of any methodology, has to be simply a purely subjective viewpoint or the other side attempting to use reason and evidence as the best bet to achieve as objective a view as possible.

[Gordon]

It is a fact that there is currently no scientific explanation for how conscious awareness can be generated from purely material elements, and the only material based "explanation" for free will is that it is not free will, but an illusion.

I admit that I do not know how conscious awareness and free will can work in the spiritual sense, but it does fit well with the religious concept of human beings having a spiritual soul, which is what I base my beliefs on.

Alan

The particular narrative you have created for yourself is fallacious in so many different ways, as has been pointed out to you many times, so I'm utterly perplexed; not that your are a Christian, but that your faith is so dependent on such an illogical thesis.

Does it not worry you that your fellow Christians (the ones that post here anyway) don't advance similar arguments to yours?   

[Nearly Sane]

I think it is more of a question of motivation.  If you really wanted to find God I think most people would find a way eventually.  I am aware that at least two prominent posters on here did want to find Him at one time, but sadly they seem to have given up on seeking Him.

No, you are saying that atheists somehow believe in a god enough to try to avoid it. That's saying we are all lying.

[Alan Burns]

Alan

The particular narrative you have created for yourself is fallacious in so many different ways, as has been pointed out to you many times, so I'm utterly perplexed; not that your are a Christian, but that your faith is so dependent on such an illogical thesis.

Does it not worry you that your fellow Christians (the ones that post here anyway) don't advance similar arguments to yours?   

My faith is certainly not dependent on what I am posting on this thread because my faith is confirmed in so many other ways.  I am just sharing what I truly believe to be viable evidence for the existence of the human soul.

[Alan Burns]

No, you are saying that atheists somehow believe in a god enough to try to avoid it. That's saying we are all lying.

My perception is that many people want to defend their non belief rather than actively investigate the possibility of God's existence.  I suppose it is human nature to defend what you want to believe in, and I admit that I may be guilty of this myself, but this perception is not accusing anyone of lying, and I am sorry if I have given that impression.

[Gordon]

My perception is that many people want to defend their non belief rather than actively investigate the possibility of God's existence.

I'm not defending anything: I'm just rejecting the arguments offered by theists, such as yourself, on the basis that they are incoherent and/or fallacious.

[Shaker]

My perception is that many people want to defend their non belief rather than actively investigate the possibility of God's existence.

I don't even know what possibility this refers to as there's nothing to go on in terms of precedent.

I can have an informed discussion on the possibility of life on other planets as there are several already familiar factors. We know of many places in which to look, based on life here we can narrow down the parameters for the conditions where Earth-like life could be found, we know (in principle if not practicably) how to go about looking for it and would know it when we found it.

None of these factors apply to gods.

[Shaker]

My faith is certainly not dependent on what I am posting on this thread because my faith is confirmed in so many other ways.

In point of fact absolutely everything seems to confirm it, Alan, since you rule out of court in advance anything that doesn't.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I'm not defending anything: I'm just rejecting the arguments offered by theists, such as yourself, on the basis that they are incoherent and/or fallacious.

Yet somehow you are satisfied with God free............an idea peppered with don't knows.

[Stranger]

My faith is certainly not dependent on what I am posting on this thread because my faith is confirmed in so many other ways.  I am just sharing what I truly believe to be viable evidence for the existence of the human soul.

But you have effectively admitted that it isn't evidence because you can't explain consciousness any better by invoking a soul as you can in the "material":-

I admit that I do not know how conscious awareness and free will can work in the spiritual sense, but it does fit well with the religious concept of human beings having a spiritual soul, which is what I base my beliefs on.

That isn't evidence; it's blind faith.

My perception is that many people want to defend their non belief rather than actively investigate the possibility of God's existence.

Which gods are worthy of investigation and why? How do we go about investigating such claims? I have seen no evidence or logical reasoning to support any of them - what is there to investigate?

[Stranger]

Yet somehow you are satisfied with God free......

Taking that straw man out for a stroll again.   

......an idea peppered with don't knows.

And the bizarre idea that not knowing something is bad.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Taking that straw man out for a stroll again.   

And the bizarre idea that not knowing something is bad.

yawn

[Stranger]

yawn

Exactly.

[Leonard James]

I admit that I do not know how conscious awareness and free will can work in the spiritual sense, but it does fit well with the religious concept of human beings having a spiritual soul, which is what I base my beliefs on.

That is hardly surprising, Alan. The religious concept you are talking about was devised by people who probably felt the same way that you do, and made up a story to explain it. Guessers following guessers.

The reason it works for some is the human capacity to be able to convince themselves of a 'truth' that gives them an escape card from death.

[SusanDoris]

I fully agree that all events must have a cause of some sort.  It is the nature of the cause of certain events in our brain which is in question.  The spiritual cause I have postulated allows the spiritual will of our conscious soul to interact and enable the control we perceive in our thoughts, words and actions.  To me this provides a more logical explanation of our reality than the illusion of free will suggested by those who have no spiritual beliefs.

'spiritual beliefs'? What are these 'spiritual beliefs'? How would you know if a person has them or not?

[SusanDoris]

Your replies seem to confirm the truth contained in Sassy's opening post on this thread:
"it is abundantly clear that people do not seek the truth regarding God but simply reasons to keep from believing in him."

The only truth about God is that it does not exist , like all other gods ever invented, and is entirely a human idea. There is an infinitesimally small possibility that one might turn up one day, but since this hasn't happened yet, it can be discounted, especially by those of us who are ancient persons.