Searching for GOD...

[Stranger]

Once a conscious choice is invoked, of course the moment of making that choice will exist in the past, but this does not mean that the choice was predetermined by past events.

Here we go all over again! If a choice appears in "the present" (and you still won't explain exactly what you mean by that), then it either did so because of what led up to it (the past) or, to some extent, not because of anything that led up to it - which means random.

You still do not seem to grasp the difference between choice and reaction.

There isn't one.

[Alan Burns]

Here we go all over again! If a choice appears in "the present" (and you still won't explain exactly what you mean by that), then it either did so because of what led up to it (the past) or, to some extent, not because of anything that led up to it - which means random.

What leads up to our conscious choice all exists in our present state of conscious awareness.  This conscious state of awareness allows us the freedom to choose between several possible options

There isn't one.

So do you presume that this and all my other replies were just inevitable reactions rather than consciously chosen words?

[Gordon]

What leads up to our conscious choice all exists in our present state of conscious awareness.  This conscious state of awareness allows us the freedom to choose between several possible optionsSo do you presume that this and all my other replies were just inevitable reactions rather than consciously chosen words?

For crying out loud, Alan, your 'consciously chosen words' are a 'reaction', and in reacting you are using your brain to think before you choose your words, where unless you post random words those that you choose during your thinking will have various antecedents.

It's just biology, Alan.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Once a conscious choice is invoked,

Which by the time our conscious selves become aware of it is already in the past...

...of course the moment of making that choice will exist in the past,...

But this "invoking" of yours is also in the past given the impossibility in logic of "the present" remember?

...but this does not mean that the choice was predetermined by past events.

That doesn't, no - but basic logic does though, unless that is you want to opt for random instead?

You still do not seem to grasp the difference between choice and reaction.

No, the problem here is that you do not grasp that there isn't one. Choices are "reactions" - otherwise they're random. 

[Sebastian Toe]

My reasoning is based on the reality of my God given freedom, my knowledge of God obtained from divine revelation, prayer, miracles, personal witnesses and the fact that nothing else comes close to explaining the reality and purpose behind our existence.

But your explanations fall far short of explaining reality.

[Stranger]

What leads up to our conscious choice all exists in our present state of conscious awareness.  This conscious state of awareness allows us the freedom to choose between several possible options

Nothing can lead up to anything in zero time. Why will you not even try to explain what exactly you think the "present" is? Colloquially it's totally irrelevant and exactly, it doesn't exist.

Your "present state of conscious awareness" is either the way it is entirely due to the past that led to it or not. If not, to some extent it is due to nothing that led to it, which means it must, to that extent, be random.

This isn't rocket science.

So do you presume that this and all my other replies were just inevitable reactions rather than consciously chosen words?

Both (and I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here by assuming you're not actually a bot).

[Alan Burns]

AB,

Which by the time our conscious selves become aware of it is already in the past...

So do you honestly believe that this sentence you have just composed was formulated before you were consciously aware of it?

Bizarre, totally Bizarre!

I rest my case

[Alan Burns]

For crying out loud, Alan, your 'consciously chosen words' are a 'reaction', and in reacting you are using your brain to think before you choose your words, where unless you post random words those that you choose during your thinking will have various antecedents.

It's just biology, Alan.

You say  'consciously chosen words' are a 'reaction'.
But you say we are able to think before we consciously choose our words.
Our choice is therefore not an inevitable reaction.
You need to get to grips with the reality of our precious gift of human freewill.

[Sebastian Toe]

So do you honestly believe that this sentence you have just composed was formulated before you were consciously aware of it?

It's really quite simple.
Much much more simple than your totally bizarre, extra dimensional, logic free, magic requiring, immortal yet it can die, "soul"!

[torridon]

My concept of freedom is not logically impossible, because I am exercising it right now.
As does every sane human being that I know.
My argument is simply that conscious freedom to choose is an attribute which is impossible to define within the predetermined physical reactions of material elements, therefore it must have a non physical cause.

Repeating the same nonsense over and over again.  You are not demonstrating your concept of freedom at all because it is an irrational concept.  All you are demonstrating in blind unthinking repetition of an irrational idea, seemingly impervious to logic.  Whether a choice is 'physical' or not is not relevant, it is logic that you are defying with your claim and logic transcends any concept of physical/non physical.  You write the words you do not because your are free to do so but because you want to write them.  And in your occasional lucid moments you seem to have grasped that we cannot choose our wants.  So the words written are a consequence of something over which you admit we have no control.   The only sense in which it is valid to claim we are 'free' to write is in the sense that nobody and no thing is preventing us.  But, we cannot be free of our own wants, not because this is difficult, not because it is too challenging, but because it is a fundamentally irrational claim.  That minds operate on principals that are ultimately deterministic is the only way to make sense of reality.  If we could be free of our wants human civilisation would be impossible.  Your claims are that ridiculous.

[Stranger]

You say  'consciously chosen words' are a 'reaction'.
But you say we are able to think before we consciously choose our words.
Our choice is therefore not an inevitable reaction.

Well there's a classic non sequitur. You really aren't paying any attention at all, are you?

Nobody is denying our ability to think before we speak - thoughts are reactions too. The content of your conscious mind is what it is for reasons. It is not magically immune from the logic of causality just because it's conscious.

All this time and you still don't seem to have grasped the basics of the argument that you are up against.

[Alan Burns]

Well there's a classic non sequitur. You really aren't paying any attention at all, are you?

Nobody is denying our ability to think before we speak - thoughts are reactions too. The content of your conscious mind is what it is for reasons. It is not magically immune from the logic of causality just because it's conscious.

All this time and you still don't seem to have grasped the basics of the argument that you are up against.

And you fail to grasp the reality of our conscious freedom to choose our thoughts, words and actions.  A reality which gives us the freedom to choose our own destiny.  A reality which confirms the existence and power of the human soul.  It is what life is about.  I am not here on an ego trip to win arguments.  I simply wish to share the Good News of God's gift of eternal salvation for those who choose to follow Him.

[Roses]

And you fail to grasp the reality of our conscious freedom to choose our thoughts, words and actions.  A reality which gives us the freedom to choose our own destiny.  A reality which confirms the existence and power of the human soul.  It is what life is about.  I am not here on an ego trip to win arguments.  I simply wish to share the Good News of God's gift of eternal salvation for those who choose to follow Him.

That isn't good news, but a terrible fate if god exists and is as depicted in the Bible.

[Stranger]

And you fail to grasp the reality of our conscious freedom to choose our thoughts, words and actions.  A reality which gives us the freedom to choose our own destiny.  A reality which confirms the existence and power of the human soul.  It is what life is about.

We do not have freedom in the way you keep on insisting because it's logically incoherent. Just asserting it over and over isn't in the least bit convincing.

I am not here on an ego trip to win arguments.  I simply wish to share the Good News of God's gift of eternal salvation for those who choose to follow Him.

So why the endless repetition of hopelessly flawed "arguments", then? You are presenting your faith as being incoherent and illogical, is that what you intend?

[wigginhall]

And you fail to grasp the reality of our conscious freedom to choose our thoughts, words and actions.  A reality which gives us the freedom to choose our own destiny.  A reality which confirms the existence and power of the human soul.  It is what life is about.  I am not here on an ego trip to win arguments.  I simply wish to share the Good News of God's gift of eternal salvation for those who choose to follow Him.

And it's exciting how many converts there are on this forum, obviously swayed by your formidable arguments.  The evil one is looking down in the dumps over your success!

[Roses]

And it's exciting how many converts there are on this forum, obviously swayed by your formidable arguments.  The evil one is looking down in the dumps over your success!

 

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

So do you honestly believe that this sentence you have just composed was formulated before you were consciously aware of it?

Consciously aware of it - effectively, yes.

Bizarre, totally Bizarre!

Yes, counter-intuitive truths will seem that way to shallow thinkers such as yourself. This has been true for the credulous through the ages - the Thor-ist who was first told that thunder was explicable without Thor would probably have said the same thing.

I rest my case

You don't have one. Vacuous assertions don't constitute a "case".   

[Roses]

I think AB should give up trying to convert us non believers to his way of thinking, with each post he is reaffirming our position on matters of faith.

[wigginhall]

As blue said, reality has often seemed bizarre and counter-intuitive, so many examples given on this thread.   What about giant lions roaming Europe, including UK?  But to use bizarreness  as an "argument" is nonsensical.  It just means "I don't like it".

[Walt Zingmatilder]

  What about giant lions roaming Europe, including UK?

3 Lions a shirt....Jules Remy still gleaming.......
Skinner and Baddiel restored railway engines steaming
Car headlights still beaming.
News read by Jan Leeming.


.........sorry I'll get my coat.

[wigginhall]

Bizarre!

[bluehillside Retd.]

Wiggs,

Bizarre!

Be fair though - that's the most sense he's made all year.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Bizarre!

To use bizarreness as an argument is nonsensical. It just means "I don't like it"

[Roses]

[quote author =Phyllis Tyne link=topic=10333.msg759077#msg759077 date=1545387947]
To use bizarreness as an argument is nonsensical. It just means "I don't like it"
[/quote]


Many of your posts are bizarre because they don't make much sense, if any.

[Alan Burns]

AB,

Consciously aware of it - effectively, yes.

Yes, counter-intuitive truths will seem that way to shallow thinkers such as yourself. This has been true for the credulous through the ages - the Thor-ist who was first told that thunder was explicable without Thor would probably have said the same thing.

You don't have one. Vacuous assertions don't constitute a "case".

But if your thoughts are somehow predetermined before you become aware of them, how can I possibly believe in the integrity in any of your posts, or give credence to them?