Searching for GOD...

[ippy]

Charlie died from natural causes, unlike the eight million babies who have been murdered in their own mother's womb since 1967.

One thing that became apparent from Charlie's short life is the value of human life.

Says the meek and mild wouldn't say boo to a goose Alan Burns, so much for your steeped in ignorance values.

ippy

[Alan Burns]

That’s essentially what AB does about evolution – no matter how many times he’s told what the TofE actually says, he consistently asserts it to say something else (while at the same time telling us that he understands it).

I know what the TOE says. 
But I have the capacity to believe that some of the apparently random mutations involved were not random but divinely guided to reach a specific goal.  And I believe that the mechanism for God's will to interact with this universe is similar to the mechanism for human free will to interact.  Without this capacity for spiritually determined interaction, there can be no freedom and we would all be chained to the deterministic roller coaster of physical cause and effect.

[Nearly Sane]

I know what the TOE says. 
But I have the capacity to believe that some of the apparently random mutations involved were not random but divinely guided to reach a specific goal.  And I believe that the mechanism for God's will to interact with this universe is similar to the mechanism for human free will to interact.  Without this capacity for spiritually determined interaction, there can be no freedom and we would all be chained to the deterministic roller coaster of physical cause and effect.

Any hint of a definition of how a choice can be free, Alan? How is it made if it is free? And before you rush to post sticking physical or spiritual randomly round a post isn't addressing it.


Oh and while we are on this, if your god is choosing to tweak things to create an outcome, it is allowing the random changes knowing what effect they have, otherwise it couldn't be sure of achieving the outcome it wanted. Which is why  the random change that caused Charlie Gard's hereditary problem was a choice of your god, and why ypu worship a thuggish murderer.

[torridon]

I know what the TOE says. 
But I have the capacity to believe that some of the apparently random mutations involved were not random but divinely guided to reach a specific goal.....

A god wouldn't need to fine tune his creation by fiddling a mutation here and a mutation there. A god would get it right first time.

[Alan Burns]

Any hint of a definition of how a choice can be free, Alan? How is it made if it is free? And before ypu rush to post sticking physical or spiritual randomly round a post isn't addressing it.

I can't answer this without knowing how our conscious awareness interacts with the neurological network in our brains.  And this would involve defining what comprises conscious awareness, which is beyond the limitations of what mere words can explain.  I just know that I am able to demonstrate my freedom by what I write in this post.  As someone once said, words can reflect what is in the soul.

[Alan Burns]

A god wouldn't need to fine tune his creation by fiddling a mutation here and a mutation there. A god would get it right first time.

For someone who does not believe in God's existence, you seem to know a lot about how and why He would do things

[Nearly Sane]

I can't answer this without knowing how our conscious awareness interacts with the neurological network in our brains.  And this would involve defining what comprises conscious awareness, which is beyond the limitations of what mere words can explain.  I just know that I am able to demonstrate my freedom by what I write in this post.  As someone once said, words can reflect what is in the soul.

No, Alan, this isn't about the mechanism. And again I have covered this multiple times before, you need to stop answering the questions you think you see and read what is written.

So let's take it very slowly. Say the choice is whether to have coffee or have tea. There are things that happened before that may determine the choice but you want to discount those. There are possible random causes but you want to discount those. After those have been discounted what would lead to any decision?

Oh and I'd added the below to the post while you were answering

'Oh and while we are on this, if your god is choosing to tweak things to create an outcome, it is allowing the random changes knowing what effect they have, otherwise it couldn't be sure of achieving the outcome it wanted. Which is why  the random change that caused Charlie Gard's hereditary problem was a choice of your god, and why you worship a thuggish murderer.'

[Alan Burns]

No, Alan, this isn't about the mechanism. And again I have covered this multiple times before, you need to stop answering the questions you think you see and read what is written.

So let's take it very slowly. Say the choice is whether to have coffee or have tea. There are things that happened before that may determine the choice but you want to discount those. There are possible random causes but you want to discount those. After those have been discounted what would lead to any decision?

Oh and I'd added the below to the post while you were answering

'Oh and while we are on this, if your god is choosing to tweak things to create an outcome, it is allowing the random changes knowing what effect they have, otherwise it couldn't be sure of achieving the outcome it wanted. Which is why  the random change that caused Charlie Gard's hereditary problem was a choice of your god, and why you worship a thuggish murderer.'

You have admirably demonstrated your freedom to write this post.  Or do you believe it was just an unavoidable automated reaction over which you had no control?  Can you not see that it comes from whatever comprises the "you" within your physical body, not from an automated chain reaction.  You determine what you write.  And you have the freedom to write whatever you wish.

[Nearly Sane]

You have admirably demonstrated your freedom to write this post.  Or do you believe it was just an unavoidable automated reaction over which you had no control?  Can you not see that it comes from whatever comprises the "you" within your physical body, not from an automated chain reaction.  You determine what you write.  And you have the freedom to write whatever you wish.

This is one of your posts which seems to exactly show you as a type of bot. Whether I believe it was automated, or feel it wasn't, is irrelevant to you once again not coming up with anything that describes 'free' in your terms. How can any decision happen if there is no cause, and you have excluded all the things we understand as cause. If it isn't about previous determinism or random, what do you have to offer? You are unable to describe what you mean by free.

And you have already stated you have no choice but you worship your god of bones. So even your vacuousness is self contradictory

[torridon]

A god wouldn't need to fine tune his creation by fiddling a mutation here and a mutation there. A god would get it right first time.

For someone who does not believe in God's existence, you seem to know a lot about how and why He would do things

I know more than you, it would seem, about the meanings of words and concepts. If you want to endow god with a claim of omnipotence but then go on to describe an apparently incompetent god left endlessly fiddling with the minute details to try to get it right, then it is you who is in a cleft stick of your own design. And seeing as how in billions of years of fiddling he didn't eliminate mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome, what was that, incompetence, or evil ?

[Nearly Sane]

For someone who does not believe in God's existence, you seem to know a lot about how and why He would do things


I know more than you, it would seem, about the meanings of words and concepts. If you want to endow god with a claim of omnipotence but then go on to describe an apparently incompetent god left endlessly fiddling with the minute details to try to get it right, then it is you who is in a cleft stick of your own design.

Just to note AB has previously said he is not sure his god is omnipotent. However, in terms of his portrayal of his god as some great genetic tinkerer, there is a clear implication that his god knows the effects of all genetic changes, including any it doesn't do itself, which is why AB both accuses his god of murdering Charlie Gard,and continues to worship it.

[Alan Burns]

This is one of your posts which seems to exactly show you as a type of bot. Whether I believe it was automated, or feel it wasn't, is irrelevant to you once again not coming up with anything that describes 'free' in your terms. How can any decision happen if there is no cause, and you have excluded all the things we understand as cause. If it isn't about previous determinism or random, what do you have to offer? You are unable to describe what you mean by free.

And you have already stated you have no choice but you worship your god of bones. So even your vacuousness is self contradictory

By free, I simply mean free from the pre determined, unavoidable chains of physical cause and effect.  Not random, but determined by the conscious will of the human soul.

[Nearly Sane]

By free, I simply mean free from the pre determined, unavoidable chains of physical cause and effect.  Not random, but determined by the conscious will of the human soul.

Again not really reading the post, Alan. In what sense is that just not determined? How is the 'will' of the soul 'free'? And as previously noted sticking 'physical' in front of cause is meaningless.

[floo]

By free, I simply mean free from the pre determined, unavoidable chains of physical cause and effect.  Not random, but determined by the conscious will of the human soul.

That is a meaningless statement, AB.

[Alan Burns]

Again not really reading the post, Alan. In what sense is that just not determined? How is the 'will' of the soul 'free'? And as previously noted sticking 'physical' in front of cause is meaningless.

But in denying that there is any such thing as spiritual, you consign yourself to the unavoidable chains of physical cause and effect.  To realise the truth that your conscious will emanates from your spiritual soul really does set you free.

[Nearly Sane]

But in denying that there is any such thing as spiritual, you consign yourself to the unavoidable chains of physical cause and effect.  To realise the truth that your conscious will emanates from your spiritual soul really does set you free.

Alan, I haven't denied that there is any such thing as spiritual, stop misrepresenting what I say! I have asked you a question which the above post is both not an answer to, and a complete misrepresent action. Once again if you do not have the courtesy to read what is said, you defeat any point if discussion. Why is it that you do this so often? 

[Shaker]

Just to note AB has previously said he is not sure his god is omnipotent.

Doesn't that put him at odds with the creed of his church - patrem omnipotentem and what have you?

[Alan Burns]

Alan, I haven't denied that there is any such thing as spiritual, stop misrepresenting what I say! I have asked you a question which the above post is both not an answer to, and a complete misrepresent action. Once again if you do not have the courtesy to read what is said, you defeat any point if discussion. Why is it that you do this so often?

But you seem to see no difference between spiritually determined and physically determined.  The ultimate cause of physical determination traces back to the beginning of time.  The cause of spiritual determination is within your human soul

[Nearly Sane]

Doesn't that put him at odds with the creed of his church - patrem omnipotentem and what have you?

I would agree but I think you have to address what people think themselves

[Nearly Sane]

But you seem to see no difference between spiritually determined and physically determined.  The ultimate cause of physical determination traces back to the beginning of time.  The cause of spiritual determination is within your human soul

That 'definition' means there is no difference.

[Alan Burns]

That 'definition' means there is no difference.

The difference lies in who or what is in control.
Control does not exist in the physically determined scenario, just inevitable reaction.

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

Alan, I haven't denied that there is any such thing as spiritual, stop misrepresenting what I say! I have asked you a question which the above post is both not an answer to, and a complete misrepresent action. Once again if you do not have the courtesy to read what is said, you defeat any point if discussion. Why is it that you do this so often?

If you’re asking him to stop misrepresenting you then you must think he’s capable of stopping – ie, it’s deliberate.

Just like lying is.

While I admire your patience by the way, I’m not sure why you keep asking him to answer the questions you actually ask. He’s dimly aware I think that deterministic vs random is a binary, which is why he just throws in “spiritual” as if that deals with the problem. For all the sense it makes he may as well say “magic” or just shrug, but that’s all he has. There is no content in terms of a supporting logic – nothing, zip, zilch. “Spiritual” is the magic dust that answers everything despite the total lack of definition, logic or evidence for it...     

...whatever “it” might be.

[Nearly Sane]

NS,

If you’re asking him to stop misrepresenting you then you must think he’s capable of stopping – ie, it’s deliberate.

Just like lying is.

While I admire your patience by the way, I’m not sure why you keep asking him to answer the questions you actually ask. He’s dimly aware I think that deterministic vs random is a binary, which is why he just throws in “spiritual” as if that deals with the problem. For all the sense it makes he may as well say “magic” or just shrug, but that’s all he has. There is no content in terms of a supporting logic – nothing, zip, zilch. “Spiritual” is the magic dust that answers everything despite the total lack of definition, logic or evidence for it...     

...whatever “it” might be.

I think it's possible to misrepresent someone unintentionally. I think that that is what Alan does.

[Nearly Sane]

The difference lies in who or what is in control.
Control does not exist in the physically determined scenario, just inevitable reaction.

that doesn't move things on from being determined. You haven't demonstrated what you mean by control or freedom or spiritual. It doesn't help to add further terms that are undefined to deal with undefined terms.

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

I think it's possible to misrepresent someone unintentionally. I think that that is what Alan does.

Then what should he do to stop that unintentional thing as you request?