Searching for GOD...

[Stranger]

Sorry, but none of the posts on this thread have been able to convince me that I do not control my own brain.  It is me, this conscious awareness which is my soul, that is composing the content of these posts.

With the exception of the soul bit, I don't doubt it. Of course it is you (your conscious awareness) that is posting this confused nonsense.

The point is: how do 'you' work? How do you arrive at your choices? Determinism or determinism and randomness? There are not other choices. I'll repeat #14701 as you haven't yet responded to it:-

Look, forget what it feels like to be a soul (I'll accept its existence for the sake of this argument) because that's subjective and irrelevant to a logical examination of the subject. I'm not talking about making logical decisions.

Consider instead the soul-brain combination as a 'black box'. It has inputs (from our senses) and it produces outputs (behaviour) - it will also have a 'stored state' (memory and experience). It would also, one can assume, have had some kind of initial state (genetics for the brain and, well the soul is your field, so whatever initial state a soul may have).

Now, either the behaviour produced is actually a deterministic result of the initial state, all the subsequent experience and all the inputs, or it isn't. If it isn't, the only other thing that can possibly be a factor is some randomness (because not deterministic means random).

[Nearly Sane]

I do not deliberately ignore posts, and I have not deliberately lied.  I am sorry that I do not have time to answer all posts, so I try to answer points which I consider to be important.  And I stand by what I perceive to be true - not because it makes me happy.

Just to note, I didn't say you ignore posts, I said you ignore what people say, which applies to the posts and points you 'reply' to.  To take an example your continued use of 'our perception' after it had been pointed out that it was not other's in posts you replied to is dishonest.  If you do reply to this, kindly do not misrepresent what was said as you did in your reply here.

[Rhiannon]

It does not have to be aware of its environment in order to react to its sensory data input.  Computers can react to data, but they do not have conscious awareness of it.

Alan, have you not seen the recent film of the orangutan using a saw?

[ippy]

We are the Borg.  Resistance is futile.  You WILL be assimilated.

I can only staggeringly stand back and admire the depth of your thinking ekim, the amount of people that try to ignore the messages handed down to us in the words of Star Trek.

ippy

[torridon]

The justification lies in our perception of reality and how it fits in with the revelations of the Christian bible, but does not fit in with the secular science which tells us we have no free will.

You can talk about your own perception of reality, but you cannot in the same breath talk with confidence about how other animals perceive reality.  None of us can, so what justifies you in your continued assertions that all other animals are essentially like computers on legs with no inner sentience ?

[Maeght]

Sorry if you don't understand my reply.  Perhaps you had better give a specific example of what the alternatives might be and I'll try to be clearer.

It was a general point of how is a choice made betweeen two alternatives - I think the thing I didn't get from your post was that you seemed to be referring to a specific example I hadn't given.

[Maeght]

Of course we can't fully answer this question because we do not know what comprises the human soul.  We can work out what it does in terms of giving us awareness and free will, ...

No we can't at all.

but the true nature of the human soul does not come from this deterministic material world.  Our true home will be in heaven.

He asserted.

[Maeght]

The justification lies in our perception of reality and how it fits in with the revelations of the Christian bible, but does not fit in with the secular science which tells us we have no free will.

You have never been able to demonstrate free will so this point is invalid.

[Maeght]

Conscious awareness and free will are inextricably linked because the definition of a free will event would be an action initiated by the thought processes occurring in conscious awareness.  This is in conflict with the idea that conscious awareness is an emergent property of the physical brain activity, because any awareness in this property will be entirely dictated by the deterministic behaviour of the physical brain.  Our perception of reality indicates that it is conscious awareness which can exert control of the physical brain, not the other way round.  I hope all this makes sense.

Nope.

[Alan Burns]

You can talk about your own perception of reality, but you cannot in the same breath talk with confidence about how other animals perceive reality.  None of us can, so what justifies you in your continued assertions that all other animals are essentially like computers on legs with no inner sentience ?

The difference is that their behaviour appears to be predictably driven by instinct and learnt experience, which are entirely programmable reactions.  And I perceive that God can make far more sophisticated computers than humans can.

[Alan Burns]

You have never been able to demonstrate free will so this point is invalid.

So what do you perceive to be the driving force which enabled you to type this reply?

[Stranger]

So what do you perceive to be the driving force which enabled you to type this reply?

There really are only determinism and/or randomness. As I said before, you need to take a look from the outside and ask if what you do is a deterministic outcome from the totality of your experience and initial conditions? If not, then there is only randomness left...

[see #14701 repeated in #14777]

[Alan Burns]

With the exception of the soul bit, I don't doubt it. Of course it is you (your conscious awareness) that is posting this confused nonsense.

The point is: how do 'you' work? How do you arrive at your choices? Determinism or determinism and randomness? There are not other choices. I'll repeat #14701 as you haven't yet responded to it:-

You seem to keep missing the points I try to make because you are thinking entirely in materialistic terms.  My perception is that our conscious awareness is not a material entity but a spiritual one, which is not restricted by the physical chains of cause and effect but has the freedom to invoke an event which is not determined by previous uncontrollable physical events but by an act of conscious spiritual willpower.

[Gordon]

My perception is that our conscious awareness is not a material entity but a spiritual one

So, how does one actually detect spiritual entities?

[Stranger]

You seem to keep missing the points I try to make because you are thinking entirely in materialistic terms.  My perception is that our conscious awareness is not a material entity but a spiritual one, which is not restricted by the physical chains of cause and effect but has the freedom to invoke an event which is not determined by previous uncontrollable physical events but by an act of conscious spiritual willpower.

No, you are missing the point. The argument does not rely on anything being material. It is not a scientific argument but a logical one. Either something is caused by other things (deterministic) or it isn't (random) - it doesn't matter a jot if it's material or spiritual. It's just logic.

How did you ever manage to write software with such a poor grasp of logic?

[Alan Burns]

Just to note, I didn't say you ignore posts, I said you ignore what people say, which applies to the posts and points you 'reply' to.  To take an example your continued use of 'our perception' after it had been pointed out that it was not other's in posts you replied to is dishonest.  If you do reply to this, kindly do not misrepresent what was said as you did in your reply here.

When I said "our perception" I was referring to the perception that we have control over the actions we consciously invoke.  I apologise if this is not the case for everyone.  I am trying to make the point that our conscious choices are not the inevitable result of physical cause and effect chains of events over which there can be no control.  I am showing that there is an alternative explanation which can fit in with the perception of control.  If our spiritual soul can interact with the physical brain cells then our conscious awareness can indeed invoke actions which are not pre determined by the physical chains of cause and effect.  I have explained in previous posts that this interaction could occur as a quantum event which could facilitate the interaction between physical and spiritual.  Science has shown that some quantum events appear to have no cause, but the stability we perceive at the atomic level is dependent on the probability of these undetermined quantum events occurring at the right time and place, so these apparently uncaused events are not random, which leads me to postulate that the cause may be a spiritual one.  Does God's will have control of quantum events?  If so has He given us humans control of quantum events within our brain cells?

[Alan Burns]

No, you are missing the point. The argument does not rely on anything being material. It is not a scientific argument but a logical one. Either something is caused by other things (deterministic) or it isn't (random) - it doesn't matter a jot if it's material or spiritual. It's just logic.

How did you ever manage to write software with such a poor grasp of logic?

I have confirmed several times that the cause of a free will event is a spiritual one.

[Stranger]

I have confirmed several times that the cause of a free will event is a spiritual one.

Deterministically?

Look, please STOP and try to THINK!

Go back to the argument in #14701: draw a boundary around your soul-brain - a boundary that exists in this 'spiritual' realm as well as the physical - the soul and its brain inside, everything else outside.

Now: are the outputs (behaviour, choices) a deterministic result of all the inputs (over all of a life) and the initial conditions, or not? If not, then there is only randomness to add...

[Maeght]

So what do you perceive to be the driving force which enabled you to type this reply?

It is quite possible that it is a response to your post based on previous experiences about which I had absolutely no choice. Can you demonstrate otherwise since it is you who is asserting that Free Will exists?

[Maeght]

You seem to keep missing the points I try to make because you are thinking entirely in materialistic terms.  My perception is that our conscious awareness is not a material entity but a spiritual one, which is not restricted by the physical chains of cause and effect but has the freedom to invoke an event which is not determined by previous uncontrollable physical events but by an act of conscious spiritual willpower.

But there would still have to be something which the conscious will power used ti base its choice on, otherwise it would be totally random.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

When I said "our perception" I was referring to the perception that we have control over the actions we consciously invoke.  I apologise if this is not the case for everyone.  I am trying to make the point that our conscious choices are not the inevitable result of physical cause and effect chains of events over which there can be no control.

It’s not a “point” at all though - it’s just a statement of your personal faith, and frankly an assertion somewhere on the spectrum from daft to idiotic.

I am showing that there is an alternative explanation…

No you’re not. You’re just asserting it, with no logic or evidence to support the assertion

…which can fit in with the perception of control.

Your perception perhaps Alan, but not the perception of many others, especially those capable of rational thinking.

If our spiritual soul can interact..

Again with the fallacy of reification? Seriously?

So far at least you’ve provided not one scrap of a jot of an iota of a reason to think that there is such a thing as a ”spiritual soul”. Why not start there before making unsupportable clams about what “it” can supposedly do?
 

… with the physical brain cells then our conscious awareness can indeed invoke actions which are not pre determined by the physical chains of cause and effect.

And IF pixies pull apples off trees with very thin strings rather than gravity doing it, then…

See that's the thing when you just make shit up and call it a fact – you can make any claims for it you like, however ludicrous. 

I have explained in previous posts that this interaction could occur as a quantum event which could facilitate the interaction between physical and spiritual.  Science has shown that some quantum events appear to have no cause, but the stability we perceive at the atomic level is dependent on the probability of these undetermined quantum events occurring at the right time and place, so these apparently uncaused events are not random, which leads me to postulate that the cause may be a spiritual one.  Does God's will have control of quantum events?  If so has He given us humans control of quantum events within our brain cells?

First, you have no idea what "quantum” means. You’ve just attached to something that changes Newtonian physics to use it as a Trojan horse to include the ludicrous set of superstitious beliefs that happen to appeal to you.

Second, you’ve “explained” nothing. What you’ve actually done is ignored every question you couldn't provide respond to, and when it suits you to do so you’ve cherry picked the bits of the rebuttals you think you can process and responded with yet more mindless idiocy.

It’s simple enough, even for you: the cause and effect vs random choice is binary – there is no third option. Either you think this “soul” you’ve just conjured into existence itself functions according to the causes that precede its decisions, or it just fires out orders at random.

Just inventing “soul”, ignoring the huge contradictions with the claim, and then using as a defence, “I don’t have all the details yet” is dishonesty of the first order.   

[Alan Burns]

Deterministically?

Look, please STOP and try to THINK!

Go back to the argument in #14701: draw a boundary around your soul-brain - a boundary that exists in this 'spiritual' realm as well as the physical - the soul and its brain inside, everything else outside.

Now: are the outputs (behaviour, choices) a deterministic result of all the inputs (over all of a life) and the initial conditions, or not? If not, then there is only randomness to add...

Or conscious willpower

[Rhiannon]

Alan, what are the limits of your free will?

[torridon]

The difference is that their behaviour appears to be predictably driven by instinct and learnt experience, which are entirely programmable reactions.  And I perceive that God can make far more sophisticated computers than humans can.

Avoidance Alan. 

You claim your position derives from your personal experience of having conscious agency.  But you cannot claim personal experience of being a mongoose or a bonobo so how could you know what their inner perceptions are like ?  All we can do is infer inner mind states from observation of their behaviours, which is the same we do for other people. And you seem to admit now that other animals learn so their behaviours are not so predictable as lower order creatures with no capacity to learn. Predictability is not a binary either/or, it admits of degrees.

So, given that observation suggests a diversity of cognitive and behavioural characteristics through the animal kingdom and given that we cannot be another animal to know what it is like to be it, what is your justification for your oft repeated inference that all non-human animals are essentially like computers with no inner sentience ?

[Stranger]

Or conscious willpower

No, "conscious willpower" either results in a deterministic output (based on its inputs and stored state) or it doesn't.

If it doesn't, then there is some randomness involved because not deterministic means random.

Are you denying that logic?