Searching for GOD...

[Alan Burns]

Belief is a thought process: so in effect you're telling us our thought processes drive our thought processes. Can you spot the obvious mistakes you're making?

It is our conscious awareness which drives our thought processes.  At least I am certain that it drives mine, and I would assume that it drives yours too.

[Alan Burns]

It would be like assort of wonderful dream come true if ever AB actually admitted that he is wrong and that what you have said here is right.

I'm not of course holding my breath for that!

But any act of admission must be initiated by my conscious free will - so in doing such an admission, I would be confirming the spiritual power of my God given soul.  Which I why I could never bring myself to admit that I am wrong about the spiritual power of my soul.

[Stranger]

But any act of admission must be initiated by my conscious free will - so in doing such an admission, I would be confirming the spiritual power of my God given soul.

Do you actually not see how utterly silly this claim is? I mean, seriously? If your mind was deterministic (which means the same thing whether you prefix it with 'physical' or not) what would prevent it from admitting something?

[Maeght]

Any reply to my question Alan?

[Shaker]

But any act of admission must be initiated by my conscious free will - so in doing such an admission, I would be confirming the spiritual power of my God given soul.  Which I why I could never bring myself to admit that I am wrong about the spiritual power of my soul.

Or indeed anything whatever - predominantly the ghastly travesty of rational thought that all your posts represent. Which is precisely what SD said and why she was right.

[Alan Burns]

As Shakes and Gordon have already pointed out, there is circularity in this sentiment.  For sure we can plan ahead, try to act on the thoughts that we have, but we cannot choose which thoughts to think in the first place, that implies we can think a thought before we think it in order to consider whether or not to think it.  Doesn't work like that; couldn't work like that; it's nonsense.

It is nonsense to try to believe you have no control over your own thoughts.  You are thinking too hard about it, and in doing so you are proving yourself wrong 

[Alan Burns]

Do you actually not see how utterly silly this claim is? I mean, seriously? If your mind was deterministic (which means the same thing whether you prefix it with 'physical' or not) what would prevent it from admitting something?

The conscious willpower of my soul

[Stranger]

The conscious willpower of my soul

The conscious willpower of your soul would prevent you admitting something if you were a deterministic being?

You didn't even read what I said, let alone think about it, did you? The irony...     

[torridon]

It is nonsense to try to believe you have no control over your own thoughts.  You are thinking too hard about it, and in doing so you are proving yourself wrong 

What is nonsense is to claim that we can do things before we do them 

[torridon]

The conscious willpower of my soul

Even that, if it existed, could not do that which cannot be done.

[Gordon]

It is nonsense to try to believe you have no control over your own thoughts.  You are thinking too hard about it, and in doing so you are proving yourself wrong 

Better that than not thinking at all: like you!

[Alan Burns]

The conscious willpower of your soul would prevent you admitting something if you were a deterministic being?

You didn't even read what I said, let alone think about it, did you? The irony...     

You do not seem to grasp the power of your soul to consciously initiate acts of will.

[torridon]

You do not seem to grasp the power of your soul to consciously initiate acts of will.

Given you've ignored repeated requests to explain how this could possibly work it seems clear that you have no grasp of it either.

[Stranger]

You do not seem to grasp the power of your soul to consciously initiate acts of will.

And you still haven't read the question I asked you. Here it is again:

If your mind was deterministic (which means the same thing whether you prefix it with 'physical' or not) what would prevent it from admitting something?

[Alan Burns]

And you still haven't read the question I asked you. Here it is again:

If your mind was deterministic (which means the same thing whether you prefix it with 'physical' or not) what would prevent it from admitting something?

Determined is not the same as pre determined.
Acts of will are determined by the conscious willpower of your soul.
Without the soul, all acts are pre determined by past chains of physical events.

[Stranger]

You do not seem to grasp the power of your soul to consciously initiate acts of will.

Since you can't explain how it would work, it would appear that you don't grasp it either. You might as well be saying "It's magic, it's magic - you don't understand the power of magic magicness!"

You're being very, very silly.

Where is the logical analysis of human free will you claimed to have done?

[Alan Burns]

Even that, if it existed, could not do that which cannot be done.

I have just done it by using my conscious will to answer your post

[Stranger]

Determined is not the same as pre determined.

In the logical sense of the determined or random choice, yes it is the same.

Acts of will are determined by the conscious willpower of your soul.

Which tells us nothing about how the conscious willpower of your soul arrives at its decisions. I could say "acts of will are determined by the conscious willpower of your physical brain" but you would then start talking about the limitations of how a brain might work.

Stop applying double standards. How does a soul work internally - how does it make its choices?

[Alan Burns]

Since you can't explain how it would work, it would appear that you don't grasp it either. You might as well be saying "It's magic, it's magic - you don't understand the power of magic magicness!"

I do not need to explain how it works when I can aptly demonstrate that it does work by consciously replying to your post.  There are many aspects of reality which we do not understand, but that does not change the reality that they exist.

[torridon]

I have just done it by using my conscious will to answer your post

No you merely chose to avoid dealing with the question using your trademark slipperiness.  You consistently prioritise avoidance over engagement.

[Stranger]

I do not need to explain how it works when I can aptly demonstrate that it does work by consciously replying to your post.

Please stop being so silly. A mindless automaton could generate your replies...

[ippy]

It is nonsense to try to believe you have no control over your own thoughts.  You are thinking too hard about it, and in doing so you are proving yourself wrong 

Circularity?
Alan, you've taken on the soul idea hook line and sinker, when you were young and now in spite of the lack of anything approaching some form of evidential base you're still not and should have by now been having a think about why?

But no you still can't break away from so many of these well versed common, more or less orchestrated utterances so many religious groups like to use, similar to the ones you like so much such as ,'I feel it in my immortal soul', 'I've come to know god', etc etc all regurgitated standard religion based nonsense sayings.

These saying you often keep using couldn't possibly come from a list of dogma sayings buried so well into the minds of religiously indoctrinated victims, could they?

Doesn't it worry you when you find yourself using these more or less scripted sayings, standard utterances that are not your own, who's doing the thinking? Don't tell me I suppose it has to be this soul idea that exists inside your mind. 

I just find religion to be so primitive, backwood and it's so sad that so many still can't see this, it's so obviously man made to me.

Necessarily kind regards ippy

[floo]

I do not need to explain how it works when I can aptly demonstrate that it does work by consciously replying to your post.  There are many aspects of reality which we do not understand, but that does not change the reality that they exist.

That post makes no senses at all!

[Enki]

I do not need to explain how it works when I can aptly demonstrate that it does work by consciously replying to your post.  There are many aspects of reality which we do not understand, but that does not change the reality that they exist.

Your replies demonstrate nothing of the kind, aptly or otherwise. Any reply anyone made could just as easily demonstrate the conscious workings of a mind which is a product of deterministic brain activity. So, yes you do need to explain how it works, something which you seem totally unable to do. Assuring people that you are right is no substitute for reasoned argument.

As for reality, of course there are many aspects of reality which we do not understand, but first you have to produce the evidence that such aspects of reality as you claim actually exist or else your second sentence becomes little more than empty assertion. So far you have given no evidence at all that there is a reality called a 'soul', never mind whether 'acts of will' are determined by this 'soul'.

No amount of questioning why  can't we see this or that, or confidentially assuring people that you are correct, or accusing people that by thinking too hard they must necessarily be wrong, is going to get you anywhere. Just because you think you are right doesn't make any of your repetitive utterances actually right. You need more, much more, to convince people such as I that you're on the right track. Unfortunately, I confess that your whole proselytising attitude negates against you in this.

[wigginhall]

Alan reminds me so much of the vitalists, who used to say that of course they can demonstrate that there is a life force, and I am demonstrating it now by replying.   Or there was the idea of 'dormitive power', which made you sleep, and of course, opium demonstrates this perfectly.   

It's a kind  of medieval way of thinking, probably derived from Aristotle.   Thus fish have a 'liquid power' and birds have an aerial power.   It explains everything by explaining nothing.

The other demo of the life force was to produce a dead frog, and a live one, and triumphantly announce, there you are!