Searching for GOD...

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Did you really intend to write this?
If so could we quote "you" as an example to demonstrate something which can do the intending, or could it have been those leprechauns?

Yes. Which part is it that’s confusing you? If you want to make an argument for “God” that isn’t hopeless, then make it. What you don’t get to do though is to divert the conversation toward what this supposed god intended without bothering to establish your premise. 

[Enki]

Did you really intend to write this?
If so could we quote "you" as an example to demonstrate something which can do the intending, or could it have been those leprechauns?

So how does the 'you' intend to do something if it isn't the result of a deterministic or a random process?

[Alan Burns]

AB,

Yes. Which part is it that’s confusing you? If you want to make an argument for “God” that isn’t hopeless, then make it. What you don’t get to do though is to divert the conversation toward what this supposed god intended without bothering to establish your premise.

Mankind has aptly demonstrated that perceived functionality of physically controlled objects can be directly traced back to intentions derived from conscious will.

So could this be considered as a precedent for the far more complex functionality of humans and other life forms to have been the result of conscious intent? 

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Mankind has aptly demonstrated that perceived functionality of physically controlled objects can be directly traced back to intentions derived from conscious will.

And for those of us working in English?

So could this be considered as a precedent for the far more complex functionality of humans and other life forms to have been the result of conscious intent?

Ditto.

[SusanDoris]

Mankind has aptly demonstrated that perceived functionality of physically controlled objects can be directly traced back to intentions derived from conscious will.

So could this be considered as a precedent for the far more complex functionality of humans and other life forms to have been the result of conscious intent?

I bet you anything that you cannot write all that stuff in words which actually convey meaning, particularly to one who has to listen to them. go on, I dare you - try it.


And just in case you wondered - I am not smiling because your words really, really are not funny.

[jeremyp]

No....all events in the physical world are not predetermined. We have discussed this already. There are random factors....which in fact may not be truly random.

Well actually, that depends on which interpretation of quantum mechanics you subscribe to. The laws of QM as we understand them are completely deterministic. It's the Copenhagen Interpretation that introduces the randomness, or something like that.

However, randomness does not help Alan's case. If there is a random element to the World, it does not make free will any more possible.

These 'random' factors are very crucial in determining the course of events in this world.  Since we don't know what these random factors are....they are considered 'other worldly'....which is not really wrong.

So, first you assert that random factors are crucial to determining the course of events. Then you admit you don't know what they are, which completely undermines your initial assertion. You can't make assertions about something if you do not know what it is.

[Alan Burns]

I bet you anything that you cannot write all that stuff in words which actually convey meaning, particularly to one who has to listen to them. go on, I dare you - try it.


And just in case you wondered - I am not smiling because your words really, really are not funny.

My words are not meant to be funny.
Put simply, there is undeniable evidence to the fact that conscious intentions can come to fruition by acts of human will.  And this can lead to the probability that the unfathomable complexity of life on this earth is a consequence of God's intentions and will.  A will empowered by what would appear to be random events, but which in reality are determined by an unimaginable creative source.
My hope is still that my words could help you to open up your life to God, and discover the immeasurable joy of discovering God's love.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

My words are not meant to be funny.

Pity that.

Put simply, there is undeniable…

When you use words like “undeniable, “obvious” etc it’s usually in relation to claims for which you have no evidence whatever.

…evidence to the fact that conscious intentions can come to fruition by acts of human will.

Told you. You have all you work ahead of you to provide evidence for separate “conscious intentions” and “human wills”. Conscious intention as you put it is human will.   

And this can lead to the probability that the unfathomable complexity of life on this earth is a consequence of God's intentions and will.

Don’t be ridiculous. What “probability” do you think you’ve identified given that, so far at least, the very best you have is just a possibility?

A will empowered by what would appear to be random events, but which in reality are determined by an unimaginable creative source.

And now comes the mindless assertion bit.

My hope is still that my words could help you to open up your life to God, and discover the immeasurable joy of discovering God's love.

I dealt with the problems with what you hope for in a Reply a few posts back but, entirely predictably, you just ignored it. That doesn’t make the problems go away though, much as you may wish it otherwise. 

[torridon]

My words are not meant to be funny.
Put simply, there is undeniable evidence to the fact that conscious intentions can come to fruition by acts of human will.  And this can lead to the probability that the unfathomable complexity of life on this earth is a consequence of God's intentions and will.  A will empowered by what would appear to be random events, but which in reality are determined by an unimaginable creative source.
My hope is still that my words could help you to open up your life to God, and discover the immeasurable joy of discovering God's love.

Clearly simple things can be created by more complex things, for instance termites create termite mounds, humans build cars. That observation doesn't justify extrapolation to a first cause though as that results in an infinite regress.  If this reality must have been created by a higher power then it follows that the higher power must have been created by a yet higher power still, and so on.

[Stranger]

Put simply, there is undeniable evidence to the fact that conscious intentions can come to fruition by acts of human will.  And this can lead to the probability that the unfathomable complexity of life on this earth is a consequence of God's intentions and will.

Except you have provided no reason to think that it's a probability at all. We have a very good explanation of the complexity of life and it actually does explain the complexity, just like a complex god doesn't.

A will empowered by what would appear to be random events, but which in reality are determined by an unimaginable creative source.
My hope is still that my words could help you to open up your life to God, and discover the immeasurable joy of discovering God's love.

Off in your own little fantasy world.

Have you now fully given up on ever even trying to answer the logic about determinism?

[Alan Burns]

Have you now fully given up on ever even trying to answer the logic about determinism?

To clarify the random vs determined issue -
I would suggest that the concept of random more appropriately refers to events which are not derived from conscious intent.

[SusanDoris]

My words are not meant to be funny.

In a way, that's a pity, because if you were able to realise how lacking in just about any reality your  assertions about God etc are, then you might see a way out of your cocoon and be able to laugh at them.

Put simply, there is undeniable evidence to the fact that conscious intentions can come to fruition by acts of human will.  And this can lead to the probability that the unfathomable complexity of life on this earth is a consequence of God's intentions and will.  A will empowered by what would appear to be random events, but which in reality are determined by an unimaginable creative source.

well, that proves I was right - you simply cannot put things clearly and simply! If you were, you might see the glaring flaws in your flowery prose.

My hope is still that my words could help you to open up your life to God, and discover the immeasurable joy of discovering God's love.

And that, to me, is a cringe-making, hand-wringing set of words. Ah, well, fortunately the intervening posts from those who take your words apart and challenge them constantly might possibly get through to you one day ... ... although I doubt it!

[torridon]

To clarify the random vs determined issue -
I would suggest that the concept of random more appropriately refers to events which are not derived from conscious intent.

You could suggest it but you would be wrong and it only manifests a new low mark in your desperation to avoid honest debate that you brazenly start to redefine the meanings of words and concepts to suit your circular biases.  Random means not derived from any cause, not just from conscious intent.  Your new redefinition would mean that the hours of night time and daylight are not related to the rotation of the Earth, it is just an enormous coincidence that that it starts getting dark as the Earth turns away from the Sun.  By your definition the hundreds of thousands who died during the Asian tsunami were just random deaths who all just happened to stop living then the waters overpowered their ability to breathe air.  Just when I thought your thinking could not get any weirder....

[Stranger]

To clarify the random vs determined issue -
I would suggest that the concept of random more appropriately refers to events which are not derived from conscious intent.

This offers no clarity at all. You still have the same logical problem that you always had, which is that if a conscious intent is not "predetermined", it must involve randomness.

[Gordon]

To clarify the random vs determined issue -
I would suggest that the concept of random more appropriately refers to events which are not derived from conscious intent.

If by this gobbledegook you are suggesting that 'conscious intent' (whatever that means in Alanese) is immune from any influence by random factors then 'conscious intent' must be wholly the result of a deterministic process.

[Alan Burns]

If by this gobbledegook you are suggesting that 'conscious intent' (whatever that means in Alanese) is immune from any influence by random factors then 'conscious intent' must be wholly the result of a deterministic process.

There is a discernable category of events which are perceived to be sourced from conscious intent.  They are consciously intended to occur in order to produce the results envisaged by the conscious awareness responsible for invoking them.  These events cannot be considered to be random.

And there are other events which have no discernable source of conscious intent.  These events can be considered to be random, and such random events are often observed to interfere with consciously intended events to prevent or disrupt the intended outcome.

All these events can be seen to be deterministic, but there is an obvious distinction between intended and unintended events.  And the source of intention is evidence for the power of consciously driven manipulation in our universe.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

There is a discernable category of events which are perceived to be sourced from conscious intent.  They are consciously intended to occur in order to produce the results envisaged by the conscious awareness responsible for invoking them.  These events cannot be considered to be random.

Translation: some stuff happens because people want it to happen and act on that want.

And there are other events which have no discernable source of conscious intent.

Translation: nope, no idea. Tsunamis maybe? Eclipses? Who can say? 

These events can be considered to be random,

No they can’t. Stuff happens for reasons, tsunamis and eclipses included. “Random” does not mean, “happens with no obvious explanation”. It actually means something like "given identical circumstances, a different outcome could have occurred".   

…and such random events are often observed to interfere with consciously intended events to prevent or disrupt the intended outcome.

Translation: nope, no idea again. My “intended outcome” was to have a nice beach house and a big wave washed it away maybe? Who can say?

All these events can be seen to be deterministic,…

Above the quantum field level maybe, all events are deterministic.
 

…but there is an obvious distinction between intended and unintended events.

Maybe, but not a relevant one.

And the source of intention is evidence for the power of consciously driven manipulation in our universe.

Translation: I’m going to use “consciously driven manipulation” as a place marker for “magic” and hope no-one notices that I’m still stuck with my basic deterministic vs random problem.

[Stranger]

There is a discernable category events which are perceived to be sourced from conscious intent.  They are consciously intended to occur in order to produce the results envisaged by the conscious awareness responsible for invoking them.  These events cannot be considered to be random.

Then they must be (pre)determined.

And there are other events which have no discernable source of conscious intent.  These events can be considered to be random, and such random events are often observed to interfere with consciously intended events to prevent or disrupt the intended outcome.

This is not only total nonsense, it is total nonsense that contradicts your previous nonsense. Events follow (as you previously said) the laws of physics and are therefore not random (there may be a random element at quantum scales but this doesn't generally affect macro world, even if it exists).

All these events can be seen to be deterministic, but there is an obvious distinction between intended and unintended events.

Please stop trying to make words mean what you want, instead of what they actually mean. Deterministic means that every event is determined by the past events that led up to it. It is the absence of randomness.

And the source of intention is evidence for the power of consciously driven manipulation in our universe.

Nobody is disputing that humans deliberately manipulate the world around them. What it isn't evidence for is any sort of soul, any god, or your self-contradictory idea of 'freedom'.

[torridon]

There is a discernable category of events which are perceived to be sourced from conscious intent.  They are consciously intended to occur in order to produce the results envisaged by the conscious awareness responsible for invoking them.  These events cannot be considered to be random.

And there are other events which have no discernable source of conscious intent.  These events can be considered to be random, and such random events are often observed to interfere with consciously intended events to prevent or disrupt the intended outcome.

All these events can be seen to be deterministic, but there is an obvious distinction between intended and unintended events.  And the source of intention is evidence for the power of consciously driven manipulation in our universe.

None of that would justify an assumption of concealed or hidden conscious intent where no causal reason is immediately apparent.  There would have to be some reason to suggest conscious intent.

[Gordon]

There is a discernable category of events which are perceived to be sourced from conscious intent.  They are consciously intended to occur in order to produce the results envisaged by the conscious awareness responsible for invoking them.  These events cannot be considered to be random.

Then your 'consciously intended' events are 100% determined - you really aren't thinking clearly about this.

And there are other events which have no discernable source of conscious intent.  These events can be considered to be random, and such random events are often observed to interfere with consciously intended events to prevent or disrupt the intended outcome.

Just no - earthquakes don't involve 'conscious intent' but they aren't random either: that they may be unpredictable (though there are known warning signs these days thanks to advances in scientific knowledge) doesn't mean they are random.

All these events can be seen to be deterministic, but there is an obvious distinction between intended and unintended events.  And the source of intention is evidence for the power of consciously driven manipulation in our universe.

By 'source intention' and 'consciously driven manipulation' you are of course implying your preferred choice of 'God' - however, since you seem utterly confused by terms like 'deterministic' and 'random, I think we can conclude that you are talking mince!

[Alan Burns]

T
Just no - earthquakes don't involve 'conscious intent' but they aren't random either: that they may be unpredictable (though there are known warning signs these days thanks to advances in scientific knowledge) doesn't mean they are random.

By 'source intention' and 'consciously driven manipulation' you are of course implying your preferred choice of 'God' - however, since you seem utterly confused by terms like 'deterministic' and 'random, I think we can conclude that you are talking mince!

I am aware that there are numerous interpretations for the meaning of the word  "random".
But this is the Oxford English dictionary definition which comes up on Google:
adjective: random

    1.
    made, done, or happening without method or conscious decision.

Which is close to the meaning I inferred in my last post - not consciously intended.

[Stranger]

I am aware that there are numerous interpretations for the meaning of the word  "random".
But this is the first dictionary definition which comes up on Google:
adjective: random

    1.
    made, done, or happening without method or conscious decision.

Which is close to the meaning I inferred in my last post - not consciously intended.

So why are you suddenly keen on using random in this way? It doesn't change the fact that choices are either determined by the events that led to them or involve randomness (in the sense it has been used to date in this discussion).

[Gordon]

I am aware that there are numerous interpretations for the meaning of the word  "random".
But this is the Oxford English dictionary definition which comes up on Google:
adjective: random

    1.
    made, done, or happening without method or conscious decision.

Which is close to the meaning I inferred in my last post - not consciously intended.

Yikes - if random is a synonym for 'not consciously intended' then earthquakes are random - but of course even if they are unpredictable they aren't random.

[wigginhall]

Or my heart-beat is random.  Help.

[Alan Burns]

So why are you suddenly keen on using random in this way? It doesn't change the fact that choices are either determined by the events that led to them or involve randomness (in the sense it has been used to date in this discussion).

It is other posters who have used the word "random" in this way.
Random does not infer no determining cause, but no consciously determined cause.
So I am clarifying my argument by highlighting the existence of consciously intended events which are distinguishable from unintended events.  This implies that there must be a conscious source of intent, and this source of intent is the essence of my argument for the human soul.