Searching for GOD...

[wigginhall]

To call Alan's view superficial flatters him.   It is just lazy thinking.   

[Alan Burns]

You really ought to know better by now, this superficial take on things has been debunked and exposed as shallow so many times already.

It is no good claiming the conscious will of the human soul as being part of cause and effect whilst simultaneously denying the same and refusing to give any rationale for how souls make choices in a way that is different to all other things.

It is no good pretending that posts on this forum are evidence of consciously driven control as by now you should have some understanding of the subtleties of conscious mind and how minds arrive at decisions.  Conscious mind cannot be the instigator of choice given it is in fact the last link in the chain of events that ends in awareness of a choice having been made.

You need to get over the 'freedom to control'.  Firstly what freedom is there if we cannot choose our desires.  Secondly, that feeling of control must be, like so many other things, something of an illusion.  We feel like we are conscious agents experiencing direct reality in real time.  We know this is not really true now. Our awareness is a subjective construction of mind which is subject to time lag and is also coloured by our biases and expectations.  We feel like we are solid, but again it is an illusion, we are really mostly empty space. We feel like we move in a static Euclidian space, but since Einstein, we know that is wrong, with both space and time being relative. We feel like we are human, but in fact by cell count we mostly bacterial and viral colonies build around human scaffolding.  Many of our intuitions have been demonstrated to be false, so what are we supposed to do, pretend that we haven't learned these things ?

I agree that we can't choose our own desires, but we can certainly choose how, when and where to fulfil our desires.   You mention several times the expression "we feel like", but what is it that feels?  And what is it that can consciously analyse those feelings?  Can this analysis be done in our sub conscious before we are aware of it?  Is there nothing to drive the process of analysis other that the inevitable physical reactions within our brain cells?  And there is no pretence in my claim that posts on this forum are evidence of our freedom to think.  I do not pretend because I know that these posts are clear evidence of the human ability to drive their own thought processes.  The onus is on the materialists to show how such thoughts and actions can come about if we are entirely driven by inevitable, uncontrolled physical reactions to previous physical events.

[torridon]

I agree that we can't choose our own desires, but we can certainly choose choose how, when and where to fulfil our desires.

That makes no sense, and it illustrates that even after all this time, you still have not grasped the concept. We do not/cannot choose our desire;  that means also that we do not/cannot choose 'how, when and where to fulfil our desires'.  It comes to the same thing, in choosing how best to meet a need, we pick the alternative that best suits us/best appeals to us, but we cannot choose what appeals to us; we discover it.  We cannot choose that something should appeal to us any more than we can choose what to believe.

You mention several times the expression "we feel like", but what is it that feels? 

And what is it in the mind of an eagle that feels motivation to swoop down having spotted a rabbit on the ground.  You still haven't attempted any explanation of for what it is that is the subject of experience in other creatures given that is what you claim a soul to be. As Nagel says, it must be like something to be a bat, and you haven't even started to consider such things, your dismissive mantra, animals 'just react' might suffice for you, but that does not cut it as a considered thoughtful understanding.

And there is no pretence in my claim that posts on this forum are evidence of our freedom to think.  I do not pretend because I know that these posts are clear evidence of the human ability to drive their own thought processes...

No they are not; posts on this forum are evidence of thought processes at work; not evidence of 'driving' those thoughts, as by that you intend something rather different.  Clearly people think, people write, people act; but all these events happen for a reason.  You are probably thinking how to respond to this post now; that doesn't spring out of nowhere, it springs from reading this post and discovering that you disagree with it.  You don't just decide to disagree with it or think about it out of thin air. It is a consequence of something prior, because otherwise your thoughts and consequent actions are just random.

[bluehillside Retd.]

ABism:

God decided to make Homo sapiens his special creation.

I know this because the chances of Homo sapiens occurring by chance are unfeasibly small.

Therefore God decided to make Homo sapiens his special creation.

I know this because the chances of Homo sapiens occurring by chance are unfeasibly small.

Therefore God decided to make Homo sapiens his special creation.

I know this because the chances of Homo sapiens occurring by chance are unfeasibly small.

Therefore God decided to make Homo sapiens his special creation…

And round and round he goes, forever condemned to be trapped inside circular reasoning of his own making.

Desperate stuff indeed.

[floo]

I find AB's reasoning hard to fathom, when there is nothing but belief, rather than hard evidence to support it.

[Walter]

I find AB's reasoning hard to fathom, when there is nothing but belief, rather than hard evidence to support it.

AB is probably the most accomplished intellectual liar I've ever encountered  and for this he should be commended or condemned ! Not sure which ?

[Alan Burns]

ABism:

God decided to make Homo sapiens his special creation.

I know this because the chances of Homo sapiens occurring by chance are unfeasibly small.

Therefore God decided to make Homo sapiens his special creation.

I know this because the chances of Homo sapiens occurring by chance are unfeasibly small.

Therefore God decided to make Homo sapiens his special creation.

I know this because the chances of Homo sapiens occurring by chance are unfeasibly small.

Therefore God decided to make Homo sapiens his special creation…

And round and round he goes, forever condemned to be trapped inside circular reasoning of his own making.

Desperate stuff indeed.

My logic is not just based upon very small probabilities, but on the absolute impossibility of you being able to make this post without the freedom given to you by the power of your human soul.  Because without this you would have no freedom at all, being driven entirely by the uncontrollable physical reactions occurring in your material brain.

[Nearly Sane]

AB is probably the most accomplished intellectual liar I've ever encountered  and for this he should be commended or condemned ! Not sure which ?

Is AB lying? Seems not to be, it looks like he absolutely believes what he posts.

[floo]

Is AB lying? Seems not to be, it looks like he absolutely believes what he posts.

I agree. However, it is sad he doesn't seem to question his faith.

[Alan Burns]

I agree. However, it is sad he doesn't seem to question his faith.

How can I possibly doubt the existence of someone with whom I have a personal relationship?

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

My logic is not just based upon very small probabilities, but on the absolute impossibility of you being able to make this post without the freedom given to you by the power of your human soul.

First, that’s not an “absolute impossibility” at all – it’s just an assertion you like to make. As it’s demonstrably the case that complex properties emerge from simple components that separately lack those properties, you have all your work ahead of you to show that consciousness isn’t just another example of the same phenomenon.

Because without this you would have no freedom at all, being driven entirely by the uncontrollable physical reactions occurring in your material brain.

Second, that’s called a non sequitur - another mistake. You would of course have exactly the freedom you appear to experience even if the reality behind it is more nuanced that it feels to the casual observer.

Third, you’ve completely ignored your circular reasoning problem. You posit a creator god, and then point to the unlikelihood of our existence but for that creator god as evidence for that creator god. That’s your failure of reasoning. If you want to attempt an argument you cannot make the two premises co-dependent – “creator god, therefore humans likely/humans otherwise unlikely, therefore creator god” is just circular and solipsistic.

For some reason it seems to escape you entirely that any self-aware species that happened to emerge somewhere could argue the same thing. Why is this so difficult for you?     

[BeRational]

Demonstrate this person exists.

If it's just a voice in your head, then that will not do.

I just wrote down a 10 digit number on my notebook.

Get your god to tell you what it is, and we can begin a discussion.

[ekim]

I agree. However, it is sad he doesn't seem to question his faith.

No need to be sad.  He has been told often enough on here that 'we cannot choose what to believe' so perhaps he believes that and sees no need to question his faith.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

How can I possibly doubt the existence of someone with whom I have a personal relationship?

Because you have no means to demonstrate that you do "have a personal relationship" rather than just the mistaken belief that you have it. Again, you just assume your premise. 

[floo]

How can I possibly doubt the existence of someone with whom I have a personal relationship?

Hmmmmmmm! How do you know you have a personal relationship with your version of god, and it isn't your mind trying to persuade you it is so? Why should you be so favoured, when god couldn't be bothered to have a personal relationship with me, I begged it to do so when I was a child, but there was just a stony silence. No wonder I lost my faith when I seriously began to question it as a teenager.

[Nearly Sane]

No need to be sad.  He has been told often enough on here that 'we cannot choose what to believe' so perhaps he believes that and sees no need to question his faith.

But then Floo would have no choice but to believe it to be sad

[ekim]

But then Floo would have no choice but to believe it to be sad

But then you would have no choice but to believe that Floo would have no choice but to believe it to be sad...... and no returns!!

[floo]

AB firmly believes his faith is the 'truth', but would no doubt challenge someone of another religion, like Islam, for instance, who claim, just as sincerely, it is their religion, which is the 'true' one.

[wigginhall]

It's not just Islam, which poses a problem for rigid Christians - what about all the people who don't have a relationship with someone in their head?   I suppose there's always some get-out clause - they've been corrupted by Satan, or some nonsense.   

[Walter]

Is AB lying? Seems not to be, it looks like he absolutely believes what he posts.

so , you've fallen for it , but you can't see it, obviousely .
I can .

[Nearly Sane]

so , you've fallen for it , but you can't see it, obviousely .
I can .

Fallen for the evidence that Alan has been proselytising this stuff consistently here and elsewhere? Yep, I'll fall for the evidence every time.

[Nearly Sane]

It's not just Islam, which poses a problem for rigid Christians - what about all the people who don't have a relationship with someone in their head?   I suppose there's always some get-out clause - they've been corrupted by Satan, or some nonsense.   

Viewers in Atheistland have their own programme

[floo]

then you are a mug , you have been duped , you should be ashamed of yourself .
He is no more than a con man who keeps up his lie for his own personal amusement  . He is laghing at you !

I think AB genuinely believes he has the 'truth' and feels compelled to share it with us. The fact that most of us cannot see how he makes those connections must frustrate him.

[torridon]

My logic is not just based upon very small probabilities, but on the absolute impossibility of you being able to make this post without the freedom given to you by the power of your human soul.  Because without this you would have no freedom at all, being driven entirely by the uncontrollable physical reactions occurring in your material brain.

Not remotely impossible I'm afraid.  Those 'physical reactions' all led up to and constituted the desire to make a post.  The only dodgy part is your concept of 'freedom' in all that.  Maybe it feels 'free', but hey, that's just a feeling.

[Walter]

I think AB genuinely believes he has the 'truth' and feels compelled to share it with us. The fact that most of us cannot see how he makes those connections must frustrate him.

AB has fooled you too
It's time to take a different approach to him 👍