Searching for GOD...

[Stranger]

In making this statement, you show that you do not understand the concept of control.

For control to exist, there must be a definable source which has the capability of invoking control.

In an entirely physically determined scenario there can be no definable source of control, since everything is a direct, unavoidable consequence to past events.  If you believe this, then you must concede that you have no personal control over anything you write, because all your thoughts, words and actions will be directed by physically defined reactions - and you can't control the laws of physics.

Why are you being so dishonest (again)?

You cannot just redefine the English language to suit your silly superstitions. The word "control" has a perfectly good meaning in the context of the real, non-magic, logically consistent world. It doesn't need self-contradictory non-deterministic and non-random magic to give it meaning.

A physical system is perfectly capable of being "a definable source which has the capability of invoking control".

[Alan Burns]

Why are you being so dishonest (again)?

You cannot just redefine the English language to suit your silly superstitions. The word "control" has a perfectly good meaning in the context of the real, non-magic, logically consistent world. It doesn't need self-contradictory non-deterministic and non-random magic to give it meaning.

A physical system is perfectly capable of being "a definable source which has the capability of invoking control".

Then please define the source of this control

[Alan Burns]

The word "control" has a perfectly good meaning in the context of the real, non-magic, logically consistent world. It doesn't need self-contradictory non-deterministic and non-random magic to give it meaning.

My control has a definable source, which is the conscious will of the human soul. 
It is not random.
It is not non deterministic
Ii is not self contradictory.

You are confused by trying to define conscious will purely in physical terms - and this is what is self contradictory.

[Gordon]

Then please define the source of this control

Most likely it is the organ located in your skull.

Of course the biological processes occurring in this organ are subject to external influences, preceding events, prior experiences, subconscious or unconscious factors (though you won't be aware of these), personal preferences (which may also be subconscious or unconscious) and prevailing conditions generally - and it can produce feelings of you being in control and making choices and decisions: but these feelings are illusory and involve outcomes arising from the aforementioned, not all of which you are aware of when you decide or choose: else you are experiencing random feelings and making random choices, which would make getting through the average day chaotic.
 
There is no need whatsoever for any of the superstitious and somewhat child-like 'soul' nonsense that you use as a lifebelt so as to preserve your particular brand of religious faith, Alan.       

[Stranger]

Then please define the source of this control

The brain.

My control has a definable source, which is the conscious will of the human soul. 

Except that the "conscious will of the human soul" doesn't actually mean anything unless you can say how it works - which you've admitted before that you can't.

My control has a definable source, which is the conscious will of the human soul. 
It is not random.
It is not non deterministic

Previously you've said that it wasn't a deterministic system. Have you changed your mind or is this a repeat of your dishonest "determined by the conscious will of the human soul" means deterministic nonsense?

Ii is not self contradictory.

If you are saying that a soul's decisions are not (pre)determined by their logical antecedents, but involve no randomness, then it is self-contradictory.

You are confused by trying to define conscious will purely in physical terms...

I'm not at all confused. Understanding consciousness (why do you go on about 'defining' it?) is not a problem that has been solved but all the evidence is that it is the result of physical processes. Logic dictates that even if it isn't, all our choices are either fully (pre)determined by their logical antecedents or, to the extent they are not, are random.

...and this is what is self contradictory.

In what way?

[Alan Burns]

The brain.

If the brain is entirely driven by nothing but physically determined reactions then there is no definable source of control.  There are just endless chains of physical cause and effect tracing back to the beginning of time.  There can be nothing but pre defined reaction, where the only form of control are the uncontrollable laws of physics.

Except that the "conscious will of the human soul" doesn't actually mean anything unless you can say how it works - which you've admitted before that you can't.

But the evidence of its existence is the obvious contol which you and I have over our thoughts, words and deeds

Previously you've said that it wasn't a deterministic system. Have you changed your mind or is this a repeat of your dishonest "determined by the conscious will of the human soul" means deterministic nonsense?

I said it was not subject to physical determinism.
You still do not seem to grasp the concept of spiritually determined.

If you are saying that a soul's decisions are not (pre)determined by their logical antecedents, but involve no randomness, then it is self-contradictory.

Not pre determined but determined - by your conscious will.

I'm not at all confused. Understanding consciousness (why do you go on about 'defining' it?) is not a problem that has been solved but all the evidence is that it is the result of physical processes. Logic dictates that even if it isn't, all our choices are either fully (pre)determined by their logical antecedents or, to the extent they are not, are random.

If this is true, then you can take no personal credit for anything you write, because it is all pre determined by the uncontrollable laws of physics, over which you have no control.

[Gordon]

If the brain is entirely driven by nothing but physically determined reactions then there is no definable source of control.

Nope: you haven't shown why the brain is incapable of providing what passes for 'control' in our daily lives. That you'd prefer it was something else, with your usual hyperbole, is just your preference, Alan. 

There are just endless chains of physical cause and effect tracing back to the beginning of time.  There can be nothing but pre defined reaction, where the only form of control are the uncontrollable laws of physics.But the evidence of its existence is the obvious contol which you and I have over our thoughts, words and deedsI said it was not subject to physical determinism.

So what? By the way there is just 'determinism' - the 'physical' is redundant, and you've been told this often. This is another of you favourite fallacies these days: the argumentum ad consequentiam, since the reason you can't accept a deterministic universe is that there is then no need for your version of 'god'. You've painted yourself into a corner, again.

You still do not seem to grasp the concept of spiritually determined.

There is nothing to grasp, Alan, since you can't say anything meaningful about it and, as far as we know, there is just 'determinism': you've just invented this 'concept' as a personal device to preserve your particular brand of faith. How do other Christians cope with determinism I wonder, since apart from yourself they don't seem to mention it at all.

Not pre determined but determined - by your conscious will.

There you go again: making up silly classifications to suit yourself.

If this is true, then you can take no personal credit for anything you write, because it is all pre determined by the uncontrollable laws of physics, over which you have no control.

Our biology allows us to think, Alan, even fallaciously - as you regularly demonstrate.

[Stranger]

If the brain is entirely driven by nothing but physically determined reactions then there is no definable source of control.

As I said before (why don't you ever pay attention?) you are simply trying to redefine the word 'control'. A thermostat controls temperature and it does so without self-contradictory magic.

But the evidence of its existence is the obvious contol which you and I have over our thoughts, words and deeds

This is (as I've said before) tantamount to lying. Every single idea about consciousness is consistent with our experiences - that's what they are all trying to explain. Claiming our experience as evidence for your idea is dishonest in the extreme.

I said it was not subject to physical determinism.

Do you really have such a bad memory or is this more dishonesty? As we have discussed at length before, the term 'physical' is irrelevant to the concept of a deterministic system. Either we are deterministic and all our choices are fully determined by our state of mind, current circumstances, and past experience, or not. If not, then there is a random element to our choices.

That is the central logical contradiction at the heart of your idea. It's not logically impossible because you've introduced a magic soul, it's logically impossible because you insist that this soul makes choices that are not fully determined by our state of mind, current circumstances, and past experience and yet has no random element.

You still do not seem to grasp the concept of spiritually determined.

Do you never get déjà vu in these conversations? Until you define it properly "spiritually determined" is without meaning. You seem to think it's a magic spell that makes the contradiction at the heart of your nonsense go away - it isn't.

Not pre determined but determined - by your conscious will.

I've lost track of how many times I've pointed out to you that what it's determined by is not relevant to whether the choice is arrived at deterministically.

If this is true, then you can take no personal credit for anything you write, because it is all pre determined by the uncontrollable laws of physics, over which you have no control.

Back to the mindless mantras. See above (a good proportion of this thread).

It would be really refreshing if you stopped 'forgetting' all the answers you've already recieved and moved on from the same limited list of phrases that you endlessly repeat as if nobody has given you any answers.

[torridon]

Then please define the source of this control

See #29782.

How do you think an elephant can control its trunk without a soul ?  How can a dog wag its tail without a soul to be in control ?   I also can control my legs and hands and fingers and I can do this because I have inherited the same neurological mechanisms through shared ancestry for translating intentions into executive motor control.  If I need a soul to do this, how come elephants and dogs can do it without a soul ?

[torridon]

What I would like to point out is this obvious dilemma -

You claim that our apparently free thoughts occur in our subconscious before we become aware of them.

Yet in your previous post, you ask me to: "Think emergence, think varying levels of what is meant by 'control' ....."

How can I possibly have the freedom to direct myself to produce these thoughts if they have to be determined in my sub conscious before I become aware of them?

And do you really believe all these thoughts of yours originated in your subconscious?

So much confusion in such a small space.

Firstly it is not my claim that thoughts emerge from subconscious into consciousness; this is what science has revealed, I am merely acknowledging it and bringing it to bear on the discussion in hand. Surely that is a better strategy than trying to ignore what science has revealed ?

Secondly, the notion that we have 'freedom' to produce thoughts, is your claim, not mine.  The notion of 'freedom' in this context is nonsensical.  No one chooses which thoughts to think, thoughts happen.  If I suggest a thought for you to consider, and you go ahead an consider it, your thoughts about the matter are triggered by something prior - by my suggestion.  You might elect to spend your time on something else and ignore my suggestion; in that case, that something else had more appeal for you than my suggestion and we don't get to choose how much something appeals to us.

[Alan Burns]

As I said before (why don't you ever pay attention?) you are simply trying to redefine the word 'control'. A thermostat controls temperature and it does so without self-contradictory magic.

This is (as I've said before) tantamount to lying. Every single idea about consciousness is consistent with our experiences - that's what they are all trying to explain. Claiming our experience as evidence for your idea is dishonest in the extreme.

Do you really have such a bad memory or is this more dishonesty? As we have discussed at length before, the term 'physical' is irrelevant to the concept of a deterministic system. Either we are deterministic and all our choices are fully determined by our state of mind, current circumstances, and past experience, or not. If not, then there is a random element to our choices.

That is the central logical contradiction at the heart of your idea. It's not logically impossible because you've introduced a magic soul, it's logically impossible because you insist that this soul makes choices that are not fully determined by our state of mind, current circumstances, and past experience and yet has no random element.

Do you never get déjà vu in these conversations? Until you define it properly "spiritually determined" is without meaning. You seem to think it's a magic spell that makes the contradiction at the heart of your nonsense go away - it isn't.

I've lost track of how many times I've pointed out to you that what it's determined by is not relevant to whether the choice is arrived at deterministically.

Back to the mindless mantras. See above (a good proportion of this thread).

It would be really refreshing if you stopped 'forgetting' all the answers you've already recieved and moved on from the same limited list of phrases that you endlessly repeat as if nobody has given you any answers.

You claim to have control.
You you claim that every event in your brain is physically pre determined.
You can't have it both ways.

A thermostat reacts in a pre programmed way to events.  This is not comparable with conscious control.

If you insist that there is nothing but physically pre determined events in your brain, then everything you do, think and say will be uncontrolled, pre defined reactions to events in the same ilk as the thermostat.

So in effect you can have no credibility, because without conscious control of your thoughts, you are just a meaningless reaction to events.

[Alan Burns]

See #29782.

How do you think an elephant can control its trunk without a soul ?  How can a dog wag its tail without a soul to be in control ?   I also can control my legs and hands and fingers and I can do this because I have inherited the same neurological mechanisms through shared ancestry for translating intentions into executive motor control.  If I need a soul to do this, how come elephants and dogs can do it without a soul ?

But what controls your thoughts?

[torridon]

But what controls your thoughts?

We don't control our thoughts, thoughts happen.  Can you make your thoughts go faster or slower ? can you choose which areas of cortex for them to pass through ? We cannot control them.

[Alan Burns]

We don't control our thoughts, thoughts happen.  Can you make your thoughts go faster or slower ? can you choose which areas of cortex for them to pass through ? We cannot control them.

So if your posts comprise physically pre defined to events with no personal control they are meaningless.   They will be driven by the laws of physics, not by consciously conceived logic.

I consciously choose what to write Torri.  So do you.

[Stranger]

-sigh-

Once agian ignoring the substance of what is being said to you in favour of just repeating your assertions that have all been addressed countless times before...

You claim to have control.
You you claim that every event in your brain is physically pre determined.
You can't have it both ways.

Yes, I can. There is no contradiction unless you dishonestly redefine the word "control". The evolved, sophisticated information gathering, processing and decision making system that is me is in control of my actions - I am in control.

The (probably, mostly) deterministic physical events that underpin that is just the wrong level of abstraction in trying to understand the system.

A thermostat reacts in a pre programmed way to events.  This is not comparable with conscious control.

They are, of course, very different but both are instances of control (when the word is used correctly).

If you insist that there is nothing but physically pre determined events in your brain, then everything you do, think and say will be uncontrolled, pre defined reactions to events in the same ilk as the thermostat.

So in effect you can have no credibility, because without conscious control of your thoughts, you are just a meaningless reaction to events.

Once again you are just making the baseless assertion that conscious control cannot arise from physical systems. You have presented no evidence and provided no reasoned arguments, you just keep on asserting it.

All the evidence suggests you are wrong.

And you are still ignoring the fundamental contradiction in your own position: you can postulate magic, non-material, non-physical souls all you like but they cannot make choices that are not fully determined by the past and their current state without being (to some extent) random.

That is a real logical contradiction in your position.

[Stranger]

So if your posts comprise physically pre defined to events with no personal control they are meaningless.   They will be driven by the laws of physics, not by consciously conceived logic.

You are just asserting a contradiction here. You have provided no logic or evidence to show that "personal control" and "consciously conceived logic" are incompatible with being a deterministic system.

Further, if you insist that "personal control" is incompatible with determinism (predetermined as you insist on calling it) and cannot be achieved by the introduction of randomness, then it is logically impossible - magic soul or not.

[torridon]

So if your posts comprise physically pre defined to events with no personal control they are meaningless.   They will be driven by the laws of physics, not by consciously conceived logic.

I consciously choose what to write Torri.  So do you.

Not quite correct; our conscious choices derive from something.  A conscious choice is effectively a memory of a choice made in preconscious levels of mind a moment ago. A choice made in preconscious levels of mind itself is an outcome of how the options available play to our preferences at the moment of choice. We cannot control how that happens; if option A is unappealling we cannot force it to become appealing.  We have no control over such things.

[Alan Burns]

There is no contradiction unless you dishonestly redefine the word "control". The evolved, sophisticated information gathering, processing and decision making system that is me is in control of my actions - I am in control.

No matter how sophisticated or complex a system is, if the underlying mechanisms are driven by physically pre determined reactions to events, then the outcome will be entirely pre determined by physical consequences to these events.  There would be nothing which can be classified as conscious control.  Any perception of control would have to be an illusion.  You are not in control - the laws of physics would determine the outcome, not you.

That is a real logical contradiction in your position.

[Alan Burns]

Not quite correct; our conscious choices derive from something.  A conscious choice is effectively a memory of a choice made in preconscious levels of mind a moment ago. A choice made in preconscious levels of mind itself is an outcome of how the options available play to our preferences at the moment of choice. We cannot control how that happens; if option A is unappealling we cannot force it to become appealing.  We have no control over such things.

So do you believe that this post of yours was entirely conceived in your pre conscious mind before you became aware of it? 

[Stranger]

No matter how sophisticated or complex a system is, if the underlying mechanisms are driven by physically pre determined reactions to events, then the outcome will be entirely pre determined by physical consequences to these events.

[Irrelevant terms removed]

Yes. And no matter how magic your soul is, to the extent that its actions are not "pre determined reactions to events", they are random, because that is the only logical alternative.

There would be nothing which can be classified as conscious control.  Any perception of control would have to be an illusion.  You are not in control - the laws of physics would determine the outcome, not you.

This is either a baseless assertion or an attempt to define what you think "conscious control" and "illusion" would mean in this context. If the former, then you need to justify it. If the latter, then "conscious control" is logically impossible and what we experience is an "illusion" (in your terms) - and this applies just as much to any magic soul as it does to the brain (for the reason given above).

Either way, our experience does not provide evidence for your assertions.

That is a real logical contradiction in your position.

You really don't understand logic, do you?

What's more, I have repeatedly answered what you keep insisting is a contradiction in my position and you've repeatedly ignored the contradiction I keep pointing out in yours.

When will you have the intellectual courage and honesty to face up to it?

[torridon]

So do you believe that this post of yours was entirely conceived in your pre conscious mind before you became aware of it? 

No, that would be too simplistic.  It's not like subconscious mind delivers entire English sentences in well formed grammar in a block.  The interplay would be more subtle; there are multiple areas of cortex involved in speech for example so the choice of words to express an idea would involve considerable subliminal brain activity.

[Alan Burns]

[Irrelevant terms removed]

Yes. And no matter how magic your soul is, to the extent that its actions are not "pre determined reactions to events", they are random, because that is the only logical alternative.

This is either a baseless assertion or an attempt to define what you think "conscious control" and "illusion" would mean in this context. If the former, then you need to justify it. If the latter, then "conscious control" is logically impossible and what we experience is an "illusion" (in your terms) - and this applies just as much to any magic soul as it does to the brain (for the reason given above).

Either way, our experience does not provide evidence for your assertions.

You really don't understand logic, do you?

What's more, I have repeatedly answered what you keep insisting is a contradiction in my position and you've repeatedly ignored the contradiction I keep pointing out in yours.

When will you have the intellectual courage and honesty to face up to it?

Well, you are accusing me of baseless assertion, lack of understanding, personal insistence, repeatedly ignoring, and deliberate contradiction.    All no doubt produced from the physically pre determined events over which I can have no personal control (in your opinion).  So can I plead not guilty and pass the responsibility on to the laws of physics?

[Stranger]

Well, you are accusing me of baseless assertion, lack of understanding, personal insistence, repeatedly ignoring, and deliberate contradiction.    All no doubt produced from the physically pre determined events over which I can have no personal control (in your opinion).  So can I plead not guilty and pass the responsibility on to the laws of physics?

No. We've covered this blatant evasion tactic before (something else you're pretending to have forgotten, I suppose). Why not grow a backbone, face up to what is being said, and stop running away?

ETA:-

And by the way, I didn't accuse you of deliberate contradiction - it's hard to tell if it's deliberate or not as you keep running away from addressing the point.

Neither is it my opinion that you "can have no personal control" over "physically pre determined events" - that's your opinion.

[wigginhall]

When I was writing a lot I would wake up with whole paragraphs going through my mind, suggesting that sentences can be formed subliminally.  OK, anecdotal.   The interaction between conscious and unconscious has been explored for the last 100 years, see for example,  slips of the tongue.    Driving is an interesting example, since probably many actions have become automatic, but also you need to be alert.   As to what happens when you have to brake suddenly, I'm not sure, but I doubt if soul is involved.

[Sebastian Toe]

Well, you are accusing me of baseless assertion, lack of understanding, personal insistence, repeatedly ignoring, and deliberate contradiction.   

All of this would be true if only an example of the above could be found.

All no doubt produced from the physically pre determined events over which I can have no personal control (in your opinion).  So can I plead not guilty and pass the responsibility on to the laws of physics?

Oh, found one.