Searching for GOD...

[torridon]

I am currently acting in the present by replying to this post.
This reply was not entirely predetermined by past events, but by what I wish to write at this present time.
No amount of your reasoned explanations can take away my freedom to do this.

What you wish (to write) in the 'present' derives from something in the 'past'.  If that were not the case, then your wish would be random.

[Sebastian Toe]

I am currently acting in the present by replying to this post.

So, no conciouness lag for you then?

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

I am currently acting in the present by replying to this post.

No you’re not. Try to think about it

This reply was not entirely predetermined by past events, but by what I wish to write at this present time.

And how did this “I” do that if not deterministically or randomly?

No amount of your reasoned explanations can take away my freedom to do this.

Sadly, I believe you – you’re impervious to reason. That’s why you have to ignore it to be able to cling to your irrational faith beliefs. The problem with that though if you hope to evangelise for those beliefs is that you leave anyone possessed of a functioning intellect with no choice but to find your assertions to be idiotic.

Sorry, but there it is. If you want to argue for your beliefs rather than just assert them, then you actually have to be able to construct some arguments.

[Stranger]

And round and round and round and round, the same old illogical nonsense, time and time and time again.

I am currently acting in the present by replying to this post.

When you clicked "post", all of what you had written was in the past. You really aren't reading the replies are you - be honest?

This reply was not entirely predetermined by past events, but by what I wish to write at this present time.

It's either both of those or part of it was random. Looks more like mindless, thought-free repetition in reality.

No amount of your reasoned explanations can take away my freedom to do this.

Once again demonstrating that you are not reading and understanding what has been said to you (unless you think mindless repetition while ignoring the answers you've already had is a sensible tactic).

Yet again: I'm not trying to take away (or deny) your freedom - I'm just explaining why your interpretation of your freedom is nonsensical, self-contradictory, and illogical. Something you clearly can't allow yourself to think about...

[Alan Burns]

So, no conciouness lag for you then?

I presume that the consciousness lag pertains to the physical chains of events going on in the brain.  The spiritual entity of awareness which is me exists in the present - it can't exist anywhere else.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

I presume that the consciousness lag pertains to the physical chains of events going on in the brain.  The spiritual entity of awareness which is me exists in the present - it can't exist anywhere else.

 

Translation: "It's magic innit."

See Reply 32221, Item 9 to see where you’ve gone wrong there. Assertion isn’t argument, especially when the assertion concerns a claim that sits outside of evidence and logic.

[Alan Burns]

When you clicked "post", all of what you had written was in the past. You really aren't reading the replies are you - be honest?

Once I have invoked an act of conscious will, the physical consequences of that act of will naturally exist in the past.  The spiritually invoked choice will always take place in the present conscious awareness I exist in.  So every action I choose to take will be invoked in my own present, but the consequences exist in the past.

[Alan Burns]

What you wish (to write) in the 'present' derives from something in the 'past'.  If that were not the case, then your wish would be random.

Once more -
My awareness of past events exists in my present state of mind, and it can influence my conscious choice, but it is not entirely dictated by my past - my choice is made in my present.

[Stranger]

Once I have invoked an act of conscious will, the physical consequences of that act of will naturally exist in the past.  The spiritually invoked choice will always take place in the present conscious awareness I exist in.  So every action I choose to take will be invoked in my own present, but the consequences exist in the past.

You do realise that you've descendent into total gibberish, don't you?

Meanwhile, you continue to ignore the logical arguments that you dare not think about...

[Alan Burns]

And how did this “I” do that if not deterministically or randomly?

Because I am not a machine.

[Gordon]

The spiritually invoked choice will always take place in the present conscious awareness I exist in.  So every action I choose to take will be invoked in my own present, but the consequences exist in the past.

You're just making stuff up now, Alan: you are wrong about animals just reacting, your take of 'freedom' is illogical nonsense and you are simply ignoring inconvenient facts that don't fit your preferred narrative.

Your personal take on 'God' has left you a stranger to reason and logic whenever these conflict with your clinging to your faith, which is rather sad.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Because I am not a machine.

First, that's not an answer to the "how" question you were asked ("And how did this “I” do that if not deterministically or randomly?"). Again then, how would this “I” work if not deterministically or randomly?

Second, that depends on what you mean by "robot", but in many ways you are. We all are.

Oh, and while we're here why do you post here at all? You've already told us that no reasoning could falsify you (by which you actually mean I think that no reasoning can be allowed to falsify you such is your huge investment in some very bad ideas) so all you have is assertion. We have a faith sharing area for those who like that sort of thing, so why don't you use it?

[Stranger]

Once more -
My awareness of past events exists in my present state of mind, and it can influence my conscious choice, but it is not entirely dictated by my past - my choice is made in my present.

Yet again: to the extent that pre-existing reasons don't determine a choice, then it must, to that extent, be not determined by anything and hence be random.

Gibbering about "you" in the "present" makes bugger all difference to that logic, because "you" in "the present" must either be making choices that are determined by the past or determined by nothing. And no, you can't just magic a choice into existence in the present because said magic is either because of something before or nothing.

Honestly, what's the point? People have pointed out why this is illogical nonsense many times. You never even acknowledge the argument and try to counter it, you just mindlessly repeat the same nonsense.

Because I am not a machine.

You're behaving exactly like one - and not a very sophisticated one at that...

[jeremyp]

The alternative to a reaction is a consciously determined choice.

What determines your choices though?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Jeremy,

What determines your choices though?

Magic. That's all he has.

[Sebastian Toe]

I presume that the consciousness lag pertains to the physical chains of events going on in the brain.  The spiritual entity of awareness which is me exists in the present - it can't exist anywhere else.

In what way?
What exactly is lagging?

[Alan Burns]

What determines your choices though?

you

[torridon]

What determines your choices though?

you

in which case, what determines what 'you' are ?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Yet again: to the extent that pre-existing reasons don't determine a choice, then it must, to that extent, be not determined by anything and hence be random.

Gibbering about "you" in the "present" makes bugger all difference to that logic, because "you" in "the present" must either be making choices that are determined by the past or determined by nothing. And no, you can't just magic a choice into existence in the present because said magic is either because of something before or nothing.

Honestly, what's the point? People have pointed out why this is illogical nonsense many times. You never even acknowledge the argument and try to counter it, you just mindlessly repeat the same nonsense.

You're behaving exactly like one - and not a very sophisticated one at that...

A decision made entirely in the past by whatever would be an act of shear prophesy by definition.
Are you really suggesting this?

Your scheme makes no provision for novelty. Since situations have a unique element to them how do we accomodate this?

You seem to just be ignoring it.

[Stranger]

you

And how do you make your choices? You can't sidestep the logic: either you make choices in a deterministic way or, by definition, they must involve randomness.

If you could rewind time and be faced with exactly the same choice in exactly the same state of mind, would you always make the same choice or not? If yes, then it must be entirely due to the pre-existing conditions (internal and external), and if not, then it must have a random element (because literally nothing would be different).

I know you tried to dismiss this as impossible and of course it is, but it's a thought experiment, it isn't about it being done, it's supposed to clarify your thinking...

[Stranger]

A decision made entirely in the past by whatever would be an act of shear prophesy by definition.
Are you really suggesting this?

Your scheme makes no provision for novelty. Since situations have a unique element to them how do we accomodate this?

You seem to just be ignoring it.

There is a simple logical necessity that any event (including choices) is either brought about deterministically (that is, we are dealing with a deterministic system) or not, which means that there must be some genuine random element to it.

The talk of the present is because Alan seems to have this nonsense idea that if he says that he (his soul) does everything in the present, then it somehow - as if by magic - becomes immune to the logic. It's an idea that is so riddled with illogical nonsense and magical thinking that I'm not surprised that it might be confusing if you haven't been following the whole sorry saga here...

[Alan Burns]

in which case, what determines what 'you' are ?

My conscious awareness defines me.  I am not a series of electro chemical reactions - I am a single entity of awareness which perceives and consciously interacts with this electrochemical activity.

[torridon]

My conscious awareness defines me.  I am not a series of electro chemical reactions - I am a single entity of awareness which perceives and consciously interacts with this electrochemical activity.

Not really what I was getting at.  I asked what determines me, not what defines me.

If it is 'me' that determines what choice to make, what is it that determines what I am ?  I don't spring out of nowhere, fully and uniquely formed.  Why should it be that I like marmite whereas my brother does not ?

[Stranger]

in which case, what determines what 'you' are ?

My conscious awareness defines me.

Not answering the question. Clearly you didn't consciously choose your own character and personality.

I am not a series of electro chemical reactions - I am a single entity of awareness which perceives and consciously interacts with this electrochemical activity.

He asserted, without the hint of a smidgen of a scintilla of any reasoning or evidence, while totally ignoring all the logic that tells us that his ideas are self-contradictory.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

There is a simple logical necessity that any event (including choices) is either brought about deterministically (that is, we are dealing with a deterministic system) or not, which means that there must be some genuine random element to it.

The talk of the present is because Alan seems to have this nonsense idea that if he says that he (his soul) does everything in the present, then it somehow - as if by magic - becomes immune to the logic. It's an idea that is so riddled with illogical nonsense and magical thinking that I'm not surprised that it might be confusing if you haven't been following the whole sorry saga here...

When are you saying the choice is determined?
When are you saying the choice is made?
What is making the choice?
How does the system accommodate novelty and uniqueness of situations?