Searching for GOD...

[ekim]

AB,

I hope this clears up some of your misunderstandings. Somehow, I doubt that it will though.

Ah well.

As Alan has been identified as an emergent property of electrons and has no free will to change his understanding, what else can be done to make him fall in line with the constraints of cause and effect which your emergent property has succumbed to?  What other cause could produce the appropriate effect?  A discussion which has gone on for nearly two years doesn't seem to have worked.  Perhaps he was smitten by a random event which he sees as the will of God which makes it impossible for his emergent property to change.

[Alan Burns]

This is simply a matter of definition and logic.  Anything that happens as a consequence of prior events is determined (by those prior events), anything not so determined is random, by definition.  Random means not determined.  Determined means not random.  You cannot just tout some magic immaterial soul around as if that gives you a get out clause from the boolean logic of the situation.  It is a conceptual either / or.   A choice made for a reason is a consequence of that reason. A choice made for no reason at all is random, by definition. Take your pick, there is, ultimately, conceptually, no other possibility.

It all depends what the reason is and how it came into existence.  You have implied that our conscious awareness has no input on the matter and the reason behind any conscious choice occurs in our subconscious before we become aware of it, in which case it is not really a conscious choice at all.  Can you at least comprehend that my contention of the soul invoking the reason is NOT a random event, but that it is an alternative explanation, even though you disagree with it?

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

It all depends what the reason is and how it came into existence.

No it doesn’t. How consciousness came to be is a completely different question to how it works.

You have implied that our conscious awareness has no input on the matter and the reason behind any conscious choice occurs in our subconscious before we become aware of it, in which case it is not really a conscious choice at all.

Pretty much. It still feels like a conscious choice, but there’s no way to describe it somehow breaking free of the underlying cause and effect that drives it.

Can you at least comprehend that my contention of the soul invoking the reason is NOT a random event, but that it is an alternative explanation, even though you disagree with it?

No. It’s only an alternative explanation in the sense that pixies holding stuff down with very tiny strings is an alternative explanation to gravity, or in the sense that stork theory is an alternative explanation to natural childbirth.

You’ve just created a problem that doesn’t exist (the supposed need for a separate controlling “entity” independent of mind) and answered it with a term (“soul”) that has no explanatory power at all.

[torridon]

It all depends what the reason is and how it came into existence.  You have implied that our conscious awareness has no input on the matter and the reason behind any conscious choice occurs in our subconscious before we become aware of it, in which case it is not really a conscious choice at all.  Can you at least comprehend that my contention of the soul invoking the reason is NOT a random event, but that it is an alternative explanation, even though you disagree with it?

To the basic logic of the situation it matters not whether an immaterial soul chooses or a computer chooses or a neurobiological system chooses, the point is, if the choice is made for a reason then it is part of the chain of cause and effect; if it is made for no reason then it is random. If you want to insist on a soul being responsible for choice, then all you are achieving is bringing souls into the domain of cause and effect and making them subject to it also.  Makes no difference really,  just playing with words.

[Stranger]

It all depends what the reason is and how it came into existence.  You have implied that our conscious awareness has no input on the matter and the reason behind any conscious choice occurs in our subconscious before we become aware of it, in which case it is not really a conscious choice at all.  Can you at least comprehend that my contention of the soul invoking the reason is NOT a random event, but that it is an alternative explanation, even though you disagree with it?

You don't appear to have even read what has been said to you - and have posted a totally unrelated response.

Look, even if we accept, for the sake of argument, that there is a soul that it is making "free will" choices, this soul still has to arrive at its decisions somehow - using some process - and it is the nature of that process that is the point. It is logic (not whether it's a soul or material) that dictates that any such process can only consist of deterministic (and possibly some random) steps.

Whatever it is that feels to us like thinking things through and making a decision, is actually a complex set of deterministic (with possibly some random input) steps. This is a logical constraint that has nothing to do with whether 'we' (our minds or souls) are material or something else.

[Gordon]

Can you at least comprehend that my contention of the soul invoking the reason is NOT a random event, but that it is an alternative explanation, even though you disagree with it?

Problem is that this 'soul' you claim isn't an 'alternative explanation': it is just a convenient assertion which is clearly contrived to provide what you think is a credible basis to underpin your personal take on faith. 

[Alan Burns]

Problem is that this 'soul' you claim isn't an 'alternative explanation': it is just a convenient assertion which is clearly contrived to provide what you think provides a credible basis to underpin your personal take on faith.

It also underpins my conception of the reality that I am able to make a conscious choice which is not pre determined by the cause and effect chains over which there is no control.  I would also contend that this reality is perceived by over 99 of the human population.

[Alan Burns]

Note to Mods: Even if I'm dead and gone by the time this thread ends, will you please promise to make sure that AB does not have the last word?! Thank you!

Contrary to what you believe Susan, it will be God who has the last word.

[savillerow]

Msg 14609 AB Thats just bloody annoying printing daft, unproven, no evidence, made up, wishful thinking cobblers.

[Sassy]

Do a bit of revision Sass and come back later, only you've left yourself open to being put through the schredder with this one.

By the way, hope things are settlling a bit for you now, l wish you well.

ippy

Actually, I haven't. I have medical reports about my daughter which include her cognitive functions and attended many meeting with the medical experts. I know what they told me.
What do you believe is the problem with the way my daughter perceives the world that means she is unable to do the things we automatically do?

The way we see things affects a lot of our behaviour.
I am sure there is the psychology aspect and the way things are affected differ from person to person.

They have now released my brothers body for burial. Thank you for asking but I am still not okay yet.

[jeremyp]

the unique human attributes of free thought, creativity, imagination, faith, love, compassion, thirst for knowledge

Not all humans have all of those attributes. Some do not have any.

[ippy]

Actually, I haven't. I have medical reports about my daughter which include her cognitive functions and attended many meeting with the medical experts. I know what they told me.
What do you believe is the problem with the way my daughter perceives the world that means she is unable to do the things we automatically do?

The way we see things affects a lot of our behaviour.
I am sure there is the psychology aspect and the way things are affected differ from person to person.

They have now released my brothers body for burial. Thank you for asking but I am still not okay yet.

I still miss two of my sisters, from way back, time makes it bearable, that's about it, life.

Kind regards ippy

[ippy]

Contrary to what you believe Susan, it will be God who has the last word.

What's far worse for you Alan, is you can't see how much of a prawn you've made of yourself via this thread.

ippy

[SusanDoris]

Msg 14609 AB Thats just bloody annoying printing daft, unproven, no evidence, made up, wishful thinking cobblers.

Hear, hear!! It would, of course, take too long to list all associated post numbers!!

[torridon]

It also underpins my conception of the reality that I am able to make a conscious choice which is not pre determined by the cause and effect chains over which there is no control.  I would also contend that this reality is perceived by over 99 of the human population.

I'd agree the vast majority of us live happily within within that ''illusion' of free will, never even bothering to question it, having little need or motivation to. Most of us are happy in our skin and don't regret the loss of freedom that comes with being part of the chain of cause and effect. I don't regret the fact that I cannot be Japanese, I don't regret the fact that I cannot be gay.  I'm broadly happy like I am and what I am is an outcome of the chains of events that have led up to me being me right now. We take pleasure in our sense of agency and being able to make apparently free choices in more trivial matters, whether to choose tea or coffee, where to go on holiday, which house to buy.  In a sense, these debates are at cross purposes; you talk to the sense of freedom in terms of its meaning in the greater scheme of things without questioning how that sense arises. On the other hand, I am very interested in how that feeling of agency arises which means understanding and accepting the underlying substrate of cause and effect which leads to the insight that our feeling of apparent freedom and agency is a most improbable and wonderful thing.  What we have is the best possible situation, limited apparent freedom, we feel free without actually being truly profoundly free; to be truly free of cause and effect would yield meaningless incomprehensible chaos.

[Stranger]

It also underpins my conception of the reality that I am able to make a conscious choice which is not pre determined by the cause and effect chains over which there is no control.  I would also contend that this reality is perceived by over 99 of the human population.

I see you have completely ignored the logic of the situation (#14605 and #14606) and gone back to just repeating your logically inconsistent, blind faith assertions.

Oh, and your last sentence appears to be an argumentum ad populum fallacy - not that it makes much difference if you are totally dismissing logic, as it appears you are...

[Alan Burns]

What's far worse for you Alan, is you can't see how much of a prawn you've made of yourself via this thread.

ippy

This is a Christian thread, and I am simply doing my best to witness to the truth as Jesus asked me to do.  And there are plenty of warnings in the New Testament about the ridicule we will have to endure in witnessing to the truth.

[Udayana]

...
What we have is the best possible situation, limited apparent freedom, we feel free without actually being truly. profoundly free; to be truly free of cause and effect would yield meaningless incomprehensible chaos.

Grief, we could end up in a Lovecraft horror    But surely you could choose the illusion of matter and spacetime, cause and effect, if you fancied?

[Alan Burns]

I'd agree the vast majority of us live happily within within that ''illusion' of free will, never even bothering to question it, having little need or motivation to. Most of us are happy in our skin and don't regret the loss of freedom that comes with being part of the chain of cause and effect. I don't regret the fact that I cannot be Japanese, I don't regret the fact that I cannot be gay.  I'm broadly happy like I am and what I am is an outcome of the chains of events that have led up to me being me right now. We take pleasure in our sense of agency and being able to make apparently free choices in more trivial matters, whether to choose tea or coffee, where to go on holiday, which house to buy.  In a sense, these debates are at cross purposes; you talk to the sense of freedom in terms of its meaning in the greater scheme of things without questioning how that sense arises. On the other hand, I am very interested in how that feeling of agency arises which means understanding and accepting the underlying substrate of cause and effect which leads to the insight that our feeling of apparent freedom and agency is a most improbable and wonderful thing.  What we have is the best possible situation, limited apparent freedom, we feel free without actually being truly profoundly free; to be truly free of cause and effect would yield meaningless incomprehensible chaos.

But you seem to be allowing the limited knowledge arising from human scientific discoveries to override your perception of reality.   We are far from discovering the whole of reality, and we have no idea how much more there is to discover.  Can you not see that current scientific knowledge may be too limited to draw the conclusion that our freedom to choose is an illusion.  You may be making the biggest mistake in your life in concluding that we cannot choose our own destiny, because this is the reason why God has given us this freedom.

[floo]

One person's 'truth' is another's baloney!

[Stranger]

Can you not see that current scientific knowledge may be too limited to draw the conclusion that our freedom to choose is an illusion.  You may be making the biggest mistake in your life in concluding that we cannot choose our own destiny, because this is the reason why God has given us this freedom.

It isn't actually science that is your biggest problem - it's logic. We have to be deterministic creatures (perhaps with a random element) because there is no logical alternative.

This has been explained to you many times and you keep on ignoring it or totally misunderstanding. How about you at least try to address it (go back to #14605 and #14606)?

[Gordon]

But you seem to be allowing the limited knowledge arising from human scientific discoveries to override your perception of reality.   We are far from discovering the whole of reality, and we have no idea how much more there is to discover.

That there are unknowns is not in dispute - so 'don't know as yet' is a useful holding position.

Can you not see that current scientific knowledge may be too limited to draw the conclusion that our freedom to choose is an illusion.

Yet this 'freedom' does seem bounded, even in respect of relatively trivial decisions.
 

You may be making the biggest mistake in your life in concluding that we cannot choose our own destiny, because this is the reason why God has given us this freedom.

Leaving aside the God claim, I'm not sure at all that we have 'freedom' in any significant sense; at best we have limited options to choose from. It seems to me that the more options there are as regards a particular choice the more trivial that choice is - like choosing which type of jam to buy from the selection in the supermarket, and even then there may be biases I'm not consciously unaware of as I reach for the Strawberry one (or perhaps Plum).

[Alan Burns]

That there are unknowns is not in dispute - so 'don't know as yet' is a useful holding position.

Yet this 'freedom' does seem bounded, even in respect of relatively trivial decisions.
 
Leaving aside the God claim, I'm not sure at all that we have 'freedom' in any significant sense; at best we have limited options to choose from. It seems to me that the more options there are as regards a particular choice the more trivial that choice is - like choosing which type of jam to buy from the selection in the supermarket, and even then there may be biases I'm not consciously unaware of as I reach for the Strawberry one (or perhaps Plum).

And the biggest, most important choice you could ever make is to choose to to accept Jesus as your Saviour.

[Gordon]

And the biggest, most important choice you could ever make is to choose to to accept Jesus as your Saviour.

To continue my jam analogy, there is no jar marked 'Jesus' on the shelf: therefore 'Jesus' isn't an option that I could either choose or reject.

[Alan Burns]

To continue my jam analogy, there is no jar marked 'Jesus' on the shelf: therefore 'Jesus' isn't an option that I could either choose or reject.

You might find Him on a bookshelf in something called the Bible.