Searching for GOD...

[Stranger]

It is not me that is stamping my foot.

Well, it's you who are using baseless assertions, making blatantly false statements about evidence, and ignoring actual logic.

I am just pointing out the reality that we have freedom to control our own thoughts - a freedom which you continue to choose to deny.

You aren't pointing anything out, you are just asserting that we have an impossible, self-contradictory 'freedom', while totally ignoring the logic that demonstrates said contradiction.

But you fail to acknowledge that this freedom is an essential requirement needed for you to consciously make this denial.

No, I do not need logically impossible, nonsensical 'freedom' to do that. Just the normal, self-consistent, human ability to think and respond.

Your conjecture that your choice to deny this freedom was entirely predetermined before you became consciously aware of it is absolute nonsense.

The fact that choices can only be the direct result of all the events that led up to them, unless there is some randomness involved, is not a conjecture. The logic has been explained to you by, several people, over, and over, and over, and over again.

You have never once attempted to directly tackle it - you just keep on blindly asserting that it's "flawed" or "short-sighted". You might as well have your fingers in your ears, be stamping your foot, and yelling that we're wrong at the top of your voice, for all the actual reasoning and logic you put in your posts.

Our ability to consciously deny anything requires the consciously driven freedom to make such a denial. If a consciously thought out reason to deny something is entirely predetermined by uncontrollable reactions then it becomes meaningless.

Argumentum ad consequentiam.

[Alan Burns]

Well, it's you who are using baseless assertions, making blatantly false statements about evidence, and ignoring actual logic.

But deliberate assertions, deliberate composition of statements and any deliberate attempt to ignore (false) logic all require the conscious freedom which you continue to deny exists.  These things could not be achieved by a perception of freedom - they all need the consciously driven freedom which we all enjoy.

[Alan Burns]

The fact that choices can only be the direct result of all the events that led up to them, unless there is some randomness involved, is not a conjecture. The logic has been explained to you by, several people, over, and over, and over, and over again.

But your so called explanations effectively reduce our conscious choices to be inevitable, unavoidable reactions.  You can't change reality to fit in with your flawed logic.

You are permanently stuck in trying to explain everything using the mechanistic logic of physically predetermined cause and effect, and you continue to ignore the fact that such logic totally fails to model our consciously driven freedom to drive our own thought processes.  You fail to comprehend the nature and power which exists within the present state of conscious awareness which defines our existence.

[Gordon]

But your so called explanations effectively reduce our conscious choices to be inevitable, unavoidable reactions.  You can't change reality to fit in with your flawed logic.

Unless, of course, our conscious choices are no more than inevitable, unavoidable reactions.

You are permanently stuck in trying to explain everything using the mechanistic logic of physically predetermined cause and effect, and you continue to ignore the fact that such logic totally fails to model our consciously driven freedom to drive our own thought processes.  You fail to comprehend the nature and power which exists within the present state of conscious awareness which defines our existence.

The above is evidence, Alan: evidence that in some cases, such as in your case, religion gets in the way of being able to think logically and rationally.

[Stranger]

But deliberate assertions, deliberate composition of statements and any deliberate attempt to ignore (false) logic all require the conscious freedom which you continue to deny exists.

I do not deny anything that is required to produce my answers. You have produced no evidence and no reasoning whatsoever to support your assertion that your impossible, contradictory version of freedom even makes sense, let alone is needed for anybody to respond to it.

But your so called explanations effectively reduce our conscious choices to be inevitable, unavoidable reactions.

Argumentum ad consequentiam - and choices obviously are reactions.

You can't change reality to fit in with your flawed logic.

Where is there a flaw? You have never been able to point one out.

You can't change reality to match your empty assertions, incredulity, and blind faith.

You are permanently stuck in trying to explain everything using the mechanistic logic of physically predetermined cause and effect...

It's just logic - it has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PHYSICAL.

...and you continue to ignore the fact that such logic totally fails to model our consciously driven freedom to drive our own thought processes.

This is just another baseless assertion.

You fail to comprehend the nature and power which exists within the present state of conscious awareness which defines our existence.

Meaningless.

[Alan Burns]

Unless, of course, our conscious choices are no more than inevitable, unavoidable reactions.

The above is evidence, Alan: evidence that in some cases, such as in your case, religion gets in the way of being able to think logically and rationally.

To think logically and rationally requires conscious effort - something which defies the attribute of being an inevitable, unavoidable reaction.

[Alan Burns]

Argumentum ad consequentiam - and choices obviously are reactions.

What is obvious to you is a physical impossibility to me.

If our choices are just inevitable unavoidable reactions to events driven by the physical laws of cause and effect, you can blame nothing but the laws of physics for whatever consequences occur in our posts.  So in your scenario, how can you possibly judge my physically predetermined consequences to be inferior to your physically predetermined consequences?

[Stranger]

To think logically and rationally requires conscious effort - something which defies the attribute of being an inevitable, unavoidable reaction.

In what way?

What is obvious to you is a physical impossibility to me.

That makes no sense whatsoever.

If our choices are just inevitable unavoidable reactions to events driven by the physical laws of cause and effect, you can blame nothing but the laws of physics for whatever consequences occur in our posts.  So in your scenario, how can you possibly judge my physically predetermined consequences to be inferior to your physically predetermined consequences?

I refer you back to the approximately 10,000 times this question has been answered before.

[Sebastian Toe]

What is obvious to you is a physical impossibility to me.

If our choices are just inevitable unavoidable reactions to events driven by the physical laws of cause and effect, you can blame nothing but the laws of physics for whatever consequences occur in our posts.  So in your scenario, how can you possibly judge my physically predetermined consequences to be inferior to your physically predetermined consequences?

Your post yet again, demonstrates the workings of a biological brain making choices entirely under deterministic principles with no magic, logic free, fantasy ridden soul required.

[Alan Burns]

In what way?

That makes no sense whatsoever.

I refer you back to the approximately 10,000 times this question has been answered before.

But your "answers" do not reflect reality.
The reality which allows me to consciously reject your answers as being an absurd explanation for the attribute of human will.

[Stranger]

But your "answers" do not reflect reality.

This is another baseless assertion. Apart from your own incredulity, why not?

The reality which allows me to consciously reject your answers as being an absurd explanation for the attribute of human will.

The answers are entirely consistent with your ability to consciously reject them and call them absurd.

Once again, you have nothing but assertions and incredulity and you have still made no attempt to directly address the logic that shows that your own idea of 'freedom' is contradictory.

No amount of repetition is going to change the fact that I (and others) have presented logic, that you cannot or will not answer, and you have presented nothing but assertion, incredulity, false claims about evidence, and appeals to consequences.

[Alan Burns]

This is another baseless assertion. Apart from your own incredulity, why not?

The answers are entirely consistent with your ability to consciously reject them and call them absurd.

Once again, you have nothing but assertions and incredulity and you have still made no attempt to directly address the logic that shows that your own idea of 'freedom' is contradictory.

No amount of repetition is going to change the fact that I (and others) have presented logic, that you cannot or will not answer, and you have presented nothing but assertion, incredulity, false claims about evidence, and appeals to consequences.

But where do my conscious rejections originate?

You believe the originating cause disappears into an oblivion of past chains of cause and effect.

I believe the originating cause is determined by the conscious will of my human soul.  A conscious soul which is aware of the past, is influenced by the past, but not controlled by the past.

You cannot know what comprises my soul or how it works or what drives it - neither can I.  But I know what it does.  It facilitates my freedom to control my own thought processes.  A freedom which is absolutely essential for my ability to contemplate reality and draw conclusions.  To pretend that this can all be derived from uncontrollable chains of physically driven cause and effect is patently ludicrous.

[Sebastian Toe]

But where do my conscious rejections originate?

You believe the originating cause disappears into an oblivion of past chains of cause and effect.

I believe the originating cause is determined by the conscious will of my human soul.  A conscious soul which is aware of the past, is influenced by the past, but not controlled by the past.

You cannot know what comprises my soul or how it works or what drives it - neither can I.  But I know what it does.  It facilitates my freedom to control my own thought processes.  A freedom which is absolutely essential for my ability to contemplate reality and draw conclusions.  To pretend that this can all be derived from uncontrollable chains of physically driven cause and effect is patently ludicrous.

Your post once more, demonstrates the workings of a biological brain making choices entirely under deterministic principles with no magic, logic free, fantasy ridden soul required.

[SusanDoris]

Your post once more, demonstrates the workings of a biological brain making choices entirely under deterministic principles with no magic, logic free, fantasy ridden soul required.

Strongly seconded as usual!

[Gordon]

But where do my conscious rejections originate?

In your brain.

You believe the originating cause disappears into an oblivion of past chains of cause and effect.

You do love a spot of hyperbole, Alan.

I believe the originating cause is determined by the conscious will of my human soul.  A conscious soul which is aware of the past, is influenced by the past, but not controlled by the past.

Yes, Alan, we know you believe this: the problem is that you can't show a reasonable basis for your belief.

You cannot know what comprises my soul or how it works or what drives it - neither can I.

Aside from you begging the question yet again, the bigger issue is that you concede don't, and since your thinking has been repeatedly exposed as being fallacious we can dismiss your 'soul' claim as being no more than a fantastical belief.

But I know what it does.

You don't 'know' at all, which you've just conceded in your previous sentence.

It facilitates my freedom to control my own thought processes.  A freedom which is absolutely essential for my ability to contemplate reality and draw conclusions.  To pretend that this can all be derived from uncontrollable chains of physically driven cause and effect is patently ludicrous.

Nope - all this nonsense is because you've already decided 'God' and are trying to contrive an argument to make 'God' seem rational in that your personal incredulity doesn't yet allow you to countenance that 'God' is a redundant notion when it comes to explaining anything.

[torridon]

But where do my conscious rejections originate?

You believe the originating cause disappears into an oblivion of past chains of cause and effect.

if it did not owe to past chains of cause and effect, then your conscious rejections would be random.  If there is no reason for a choice then it is merely a random event.   If humans had evolved such random behaviours we would not be here to discuss it.  This is not really that difficult Alan.

[torridon]

But your conscious ability to apply rational thought contradicts the absurd logic you put forward.The explanations you put forward do not explain the freedom I have to contradict these explanations.  Yes, I have the freedom to consciously make assertions.  Assertions which can't possibly be predetermined by the past, because they are determined by my conscious awareness - which exists and acts within my present state of mind.

This makes no sense, given that our conscious awareness is a product of the past. My current state of mind is necessarily and inevitably a consequence of the factors that led to that state of mind.  If I am laughing now, it is because somebody told me a joke in the past.  If I am responding to a post on here, I have already read a post in the past that prompted a desire in me to respond. It's absurd that you cannot grasp this simple point of logic.

[torridon]

You cannot know what comprises my soul or how it works or what drives it - neither can I.  But I know what it does.  It facilitates my freedom to control my own thought processes.  A freedom which is absolutely essential for my ability to contemplate reality and draw conclusions.  To pretend that this can all be derived from uncontrollable chains of physically driven cause and effect is patently ludicrous.

Argument from ignorance.  You cannot understand how simple logic plays out in our lives, hence, soul, hence magic.  We really should be able to do better than that.

[Stranger]

But where do my conscious rejections originate?

In your brain.

You believe the originating cause disappears into an oblivion of past chains of cause and effect.

Your brain does things for reasons - otherwise it would be doing random things.

I believe the originating cause is determined by the conscious will of my human soul.  A conscious soul which is aware of the past, is influenced by the past, but not controlled by the past.

YET AGAIN: it doesn't matter a jot if you posit a soul because your 'problem' is logical; it doesn't rely on the physical world. To the extent that a choice is not entirely due to the reasons that led up to it, it is due to no reason, and is therefore, to that extent, random.

Now you can ignore that for about the 10,000th time.

You cannot know what comprises my soul or how it works or what drives it - neither can I.  But I know what it does.  It facilitates my freedom to control my own thought processes.  A freedom which is absolutely essential for my ability to contemplate reality and draw conclusions.  To pretend that this can all be derived from uncontrollable chains of physically driven cause and effect is patently ludicrous.

This is just incredulity again. You have (yet again) failed to point out any actual problem with a deterministic mind and you have still failed to provide any answer to the logic (above) that tells us that your notion of 'freedom' is impossible.

[wigginhall]

"Patently ludicrous", AB's paraphrase of incredulity.   That's all he can offer really.

[Alan Burns]

Nope - all this nonsense is because you've already decided 'God' and are trying to contrive an argument to make 'God' seem rational in that your personal incredulity doesn't yet allow you to countenance that 'God' is a redundant notion when it comes to explaining anything.

No
My arguments do not start with a belief in God.
They start with a belief in myself and my capabilities and in my freedom to make conscious choices.

[SusanDoris]

No
My arguments do not start with a belief in God.
They start with a belief in myself and my capabilities and in my freedom to make conscious choices.

Which seems to demonstrate huge conceit rather than anything else.

[Alan Burns]

.

YET AGAIN: it doesn't matter a jot if you posit a soul because your 'problem' is logical; it doesn't rely on the physical world. To the extent that a choice is not entirely due to the reasons that led up to it, it is due to no reason, and is therefore, to that extent, random.

Now you can ignore that for about the 10,000th time.

The reason for a choice is determined by your consciously driven will.
A will which is not shackled by past events because it works in the present, and gives you the conscious freedom to choose.  Your consciousness is not a mere spectator upon what has already been predetermined.  Your consciousness invokes choices, it does not just perceive them.

[Gordon]

The reason for a choice is determined by your consciously driven will.

So, assuming this 'consciously driven will' you speak of doesn't function randomly what factors influence this 'consciously driven will'? 

A will which is not shackled by past events because it works in the present, and gives you the conscious freedom to choose.  Your consciousness is not a mere spectator upon what has already been predetermined.  Your consciousness invokes choices, it does not just perceive them.

As you've been told the present isn't all you've cracked it up to be, and unless this 'invoking' happens randomly then some antecedents are involved no matter how hard you try to avoid this inescapable logical conclusion.

[Sebastian Toe]

The reason for a choice is determined by your consciously driven will.
A will which is not shackled by past events because it works in the present, and gives you the conscious freedom to choose.  Your consciousness is not a mere spectator upon what has already been predetermined.  Your consciousness invokes choices, it does not just perceive them.

Your post is a wonderful demonstration of the workings of a biological brain making choices entirely under deterministic principles with no magic, logic free, fantasy ridden soul required.