Searching for GOD...

[jeremyp]

You could look upon your life as a painting, where every brush stoke is done by you using your own gift of freewill.  The fact that God can see the finished work from His timeless dimension does not take away our freedom to create it.

Yes it does. If God knows that I will apply a certain brush stroke in a certain place, nothing I can do will change that.

[jeremyp]

That actually sounds like its based on a questionable adherence to reductionism.

What is it that makes you hold onto reductionism..........at the lower levels of organisation?

Before I answer that question, please explain exactly what you mean by "reductionism".

[Stranger]

We all have the God given freedom which enables us to take credit for what we do with our own precious lives, each of us using our own unique set of talents.

"It's magic, innit?" I see you're still studiously avoiding actually thinking about the logic of the situation...

[Roses]

I wonder if AB is desperately trying to convince himself that his depiction of god is a fact, like I am trying to convince myself that I am still a girl in her first flush of youth?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Before I answer that question, please explain exactly what you mean by "reductionism".

Certainly what I mean is outlined here.
I call your attention to the articles reflection on the nature of reductionist statements and the relationship and differences between reductionism and eliminativism and emergentism
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductionism

[Alan Burns]

"It's magic, innit?" I see you're still studiously avoiding actually thinking about the logic of the situation...

I am simply aware of my ability to invoke choices according to my conscious will.
You claim it is a logical impossibility
I claim it is reality.

I believe the key to this lies with what comprises our conscious awareness, and how it works and interacts with our physical brain.  My perception is that our conscious awareness exists and interacts in a spiritual dimension which is always in the present.  It is aware of the past, but not driven by it.

I have no doubt one day we will discover which is the truth.

[Roses]

I am simply aware of my ability to invoke choices according to my conscious will.
You claim it is a logical impossibility
I claim it is reality.

I believe the key to this lies with what comprises our conscious awareness, and how it works and interacts with our physical brain.  My perception is that our conscious awareness exists and interacts in a spiritual dimension which is always in the present.  It is aware of the past, but not driven by it.

I have no doubt one day we will discover which is the truth.

I wonder how you would react if you discovered it was nothing to do with a god?

[Alan Burns]

I wonder how you would react if you discovered it was nothing to do with a god?

That is what I would honestly consider to be a logical impossibility.   

[Stranger]

I am simply aware of my ability to invoke choices according to my conscious will.
You claim it is a logical impossibility
I claim it is reality.

Which shows just how much attention you've been paying.   

I have never said you couldn't make a choice according to your conscious will - that was never the issue. It's about how your conscious will arrives at it choices. It either does so entirely for the reasons that led to the choice or not. Not tells us that some part of the choice was for no reason (random).

It really is simple and there is obviously no third option.

I believe the key to this lies with what comprises our conscious awareness, and how it works and interacts with our physical brain.  My perception is that our conscious awareness exists and interacts in a spiritual dimension which is always in the present.

The mechanism couldn't be less relevant. This is a logical constraint that has nothing to do with the specifics.

It is aware of the past, but not driven by it.

To the extent it isn't, it is driven by nothing (random).

[Roses]

That is what I would honestly consider to be a logical impossibility.   

Why?

[Stranger]

That is what I would honestly consider to be a logical impossibility.   

Odd that you can never actually produce any logic to support your view and you do anything but address the logic that is against you...

[Stranger]

...our conscious awareness exists and interacts in a spiritual dimension which is always in the present.

And you still, despite multiple requests, haven't defined "the present" in any way that makes a logical difference to anything.

[Gordon]

My perception is that our conscious awareness exists and interacts in a spiritual dimension which is always in the present.  It is aware of the past, but not driven by it.

I have no doubt one day we will discover which is the truth.

It seems that the present isn't all it is cracked up to be.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/there-is-no-now/

[jeremyp]

Certainly what I mean is outlined here.
I call your attention to the articles reflection on the nature of reductionist statements and the relationship and differences between reductionism and eliminativism and emergentism
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductionism

My apologies, I obviously wasn’t clear enough. I would like you to explain what you mean by reductionism. 

[jeremyp]

Certainly what I mean is outlined here.
I call your attention to the articles reflection on the nature of reductionist statements and the relationship and differences between reductionism and eliminativism and emergentism
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductionism

And if you want to understand why I want you to explain what you mean by reductionism, have a look at the article you linked. It’s quite long and it discusses several different versions of reductionism. I could easily pick the wrong one from your point of view which would be a waste of both of our time.

Not to mention that I’m not convinced that you are not one of the people alluded to in the second sentence who abuse the meaning.

[BeRational]

It seems that the present isn't all it is cracked up to be.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/there-is-no-now/

Very interesting and shows that there is no real now.

I wonder what excuse or fudge AB will use?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And if you want to understand why I want you to explain what you mean by reductionism, have a look at the article you linked. It’s quite long and it discusses several different versions of reductionism. I could easily pick the wrong one from your point of view which would be a waste of both of our time.

At least one of its descriptions adequately describes your position and criticises it.

[Alan Burns]

And you still, despite multiple requests, haven't defined "the present" in any way that makes a logical difference to anything.

The present is simply defined by where your conscious awareness exists.

[torridon]

I am simply aware of my ability to invoke choices according to my conscious will.
You claim it is a logical impossibility
I claim it is reality.

I believe the key to this lies with what comprises our conscious awareness, and how it works and interacts with our physical brain.  My perception is that our conscious awareness exists and interacts in a spiritual dimension which is always in the present.  It is aware of the past, but not driven by it.

I have no doubt one day we will discover which is the truth.

We've already discovered that our conscious awareness does not 'live in the present', your repeated denial and expressions of incredulity do not constitute counter evidence, and fantasy beliefs about unevidenced 'spiritual dimensions' are no substitute for being an honest reporter willing to learn from the evidence.  Even if our common perceptions of living in the present were true, that still does not alter the logic of the arrow of time, in that the current moment is a function of the previous moment and cannot be 'free' from it.  Something that is a consequence cannot be free of the precursor that gave rise to it.  The idea that we can still make meaningful choices whilst being 'free' of the relevant influences is profoundly irrational.

[Stranger]

The present is simply defined by where your conscious awareness exists.

This manages to be both circular and utterly meaningless. There is no such thing as the present. Colloquially it's just a short amount of time, so is logically irrelevant. If you try to be more exact about it, at best (if you ignore a lot of difficulties), it lasts for no time so nothing can happen in it.

It can have no relevance to the logic of choice making that you keep on running away from.

[Gordon]

The present is simply defined by where your conscious awareness exists.

If is defined by being consciously aware, as you say, then what feels like the present moment is always slightly in the past no matter how immediate it may feel: close enough in the past to be indistinguishable for most practical purposes, perhaps, but it would still be a mistake to fail to acknowledge that perceiving and thinking always involves processing time.     

[Alan Burns]

If is defined by being consciously aware, as you say, then what feels like the present moment is always slightly in the past no matter how immediate it may feel: close enough in the past to be indistinguishable for most practical purposes, perhaps, but it would still be a mistake to fail to acknowledge that perceiving and thinking always involves processing time.   

But from my own personal existence, my conscious awareness is all I have.  It is my present.  It is where I exist.  It is where I invoke my conscious choice.  The choices I make from my present will take time to physically perform.  The data I perceive in my present will have taken time to be processed through my physical senses.  But it all exists in my present - my conscious awareness

[Alan Burns]

The idea that we can still make meaningful choices whilst being 'free' of the relevant influences is profoundly irrational.

I have never claimed that our conscious choices are free from influences.
But influences, by definition, do not make a choice - they influence it.

[Stranger]

But from my own personal existence, my conscious awareness is all I have.  It is my present.  It is where I exist.  It is where I invoke my conscious choice.  The choices I make from my present will take time to physically perform.  The data I perceive in my present will have taken time to be processed through my physical senses.  But it all exists in my present - my conscious awareness

This is totally irrelevant waffle as far as the logic goes. When you come to each stage of a choice, either all the reasons for it (from the immediate past; internal and external to your mind) fully determine it, or, to some extent, it is for no reason (random).

[torridon]

I have never claimed that our conscious choices are free from influences.
But influences, by definition, do not make a choice - they influence it.

The choice is resolved somehow though, and it is out of the competition between rival influences that a choice emerges.  Whichever influence turns out to have been the dominant influence, that was the determinant that resolved the choice.