Searching for GOD...

[Gordon]

Everything in our physical universe is subject to determinism.

'Physical' is redundant in relation to how you use the term: 'determinism' is sufficient, and anyway it is the logic you aren't getting.

But physically driven determinism will allow no freedom to facilitate conscious control, manipulation, choice or deliberation because everything will comprise inevitable uncontrollable physically defined reactions to previous events.  Our freedom to think, choose, control, manipulate etc must be derived from something which is not constrained by the physical laws of material science over which we can have no control.

Yet all these aspects that you set such store by are just the output of bits of biology, without which you can't 'think, choose, control, manipulate etc' - your use of 'must' here is just a feature of your personal incredulity.
 

Our freedom to consciously control our thoughts, word and actions must originate from a power beyond this physically predetermined material universe.  The power of the human soul can consciously perceive and interact with this universe, but this consciously driven freedom can't be part of this material universe.

Yet more fallacious theobabble, Alan.

[torridon]

I have never claimed that we can make choices for no reason.

We all have the freedom to choose between feasible options.  A choice which may well be influenced by antecedents, but not entirely controlled by them, otherwise it becomes an unavoidable reaction to antecedents.

and a choice has to be resolved somehow, how do you think that happens ?  The choice will be the feasible option that was the most influential.  Really, is this so hard to grasp ?

[torridon]

Everything in our physical universe is subject to determinism.  But physically driven determinism will allow no freedom to facilitate conscious control, manipulation, choice or deliberation because everything will comprise inevitable uncontrollable physically defined reactions to previous events.  Our freedom to think, choose, control, manipulate etc must be derived from something which is not constrained by the physical laws of material science over which we can have no control.  Our freedom to consciously control our thoughts, word and actions must originate from a power beyond this physically predetermined material universe.  The power of the human soul can consciously perceive and interact with this universe, but this consciously driven freedom can't be part of this material universe.

That's a pile of vacuous simplistic nonsense that has been dismissed time and time again. 'Conscious control' is a phenomenon of life and life is itself a deterministic system. You really need to get over this; life is not magic, thoughts are not magic, conscious control is not magic, these are all phenomena of the natural world, you are firmly embedded in cloud cuckoo land.

[Sebastian Toe]

And I feel sorry for those who do not appreciate the amazing gift of human freewill and presume that they are nothing more than biological robots with no choices of their own.

And I feel sorry for anyone who does not realise that you have just demonsteted the workings of a biological brain making choices entirely under deterministic principles with no magic, logic free, fantasy ridden soul required.

[SusanDoris]

AB writes posts that make me cringe .. ... ...
In my opinion,his thinking is  shallow, lacks any logical thought and he is totally unprepared to even consider he might be wrong.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

You imply that there are two levels of abstraction.  One in which we perceive our ability to reason and make conscious choices, and a lower level which implies that these perceptions must be illusionary.

At least two and probably more, and they are "illusory" – necessarily so – as an explanation for what’s also going on under the bonnet because they are inherently irrational. That’s why you conjure up magic to get you off the hook of the binary determined vs random problem, which as even you must dimly suspect is idiotic.   

Can you not envisage the possibility that your perceptions of reasoning and choice are real, and that it is your flawed reasoning that leads you to believe that these perceptions are an illusion?

You’ve been corrected on your possible vs probable error many times now, so why repeat it here? I can envisage anything you like, but when it leads to the logical dead end of the perception of “free” choice being actually free (ie, neither determined nor random) then you’re in a world of nonsense.     

The fact that you are able to consciously reason is surely evidence that you comprise more than physically driven material reactions can ever achieve?

Only if you don’t think about it. When you do think about it though, you quickly realise that it’s evidence of no such thing. The only evidence this gives us is that evidence that you’re not a thinking person.

Or an honest one.   

[Enki]

Without my God given gift of the power of freewill, I would be unable to consciously come up with any arguments or reasoning, because I would be entirely controlled by something over which I have no personal control.

Well it seems that you agree with me then. As you seem to be unable to produce any sound arguments in favour of your point of view, you simply keep resorting to incredulity and assertion. Hence your idea of a God given gift of the power of freewill enabling  you to come up with arguments and reasoning seems to be dead in the water.

[Alan Burns]

'Physical' is redundant in relation to how you use the term: 'determinism' is sufficient, and anyway it is the logic you aren't getting.

Yet all these aspects that you set such store by are just the output of bits of biology, without which you can't 'think, choose, control, manipulate etc' - your use of 'must' here is just a feature of your personal incredulity.
 
Yet more fallacious theobabble, Alan.

Biology provides the machine - you are in control.
You or I have no control over physical determinism.  The laws of physics rules!

Hence the evidence of spiritual determinism to facilitate real thinking, choosing, controlling, manipulating etc

[Alan Burns]

and a choice has to be resolved somehow, how do you think that happens ?  The choice will be the feasible option that was the most influential.  Really, is this so hard to grasp ?

My choice is consciously determined.  It is definitely not an automated reaction over which I have no control.

[Alan Burns]

That's a pile of vacuous simplistic nonsense that has been dismissed time and time again. 'Conscious control' is a phenomenon of life and life is itself a deterministic system. You really need to get over this; life is not magic, thoughts are not magic, conscious control is not magic, these are all phenomena of the natural world, you are firmly embedded in cloud cuckoo land.

There can be no control in a physically predetermined scenario - just automated reactions.
The concept of conscious control does not exist outside human perception.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

Biology provides the machine - you are in control.

“You” are "the machine".

You or I have no control over physical determinism.

That’s because “you or I” are deterministic processes no matter how much you might want to magic your way to some irrationally impossible alternative.

The laws of physics rules!

Then stop showing contempt for them, and maybe even try to find out something about them too.

Hence the evidence of spiritual determinism to facilitate real thinking, choosing, controlling, manipulating etc

You have no evidence. I explained why a few posts back, but your pathological dishonesty meant you just ignored it.

Again.

[Gordon]

Biology provides the machine - you are in control.

And 'I' am my biology (such as it is).

You or I have no control over physical determinism.  The laws of physics rules!

Seems that way (as far as is known to date).

Hence the evidence of spiritual determinism to facilitate real thinking, choosing, controlling, manipulating etc

'Spiritual determinism' is just an unevidenced assertion you've invented in order to make your take on 'God' appear rational - doesn't wash old chap.

[Nearly Sane]

Biology provides the machine - you are in control.
You or I have no control over physical determinism.  The laws of physics rules!

Hence the evidence of spiritual determinism to facilitate real thinking, choosing, controlling, manipulating etc

You use the word evidence as so many Catholic priests use children: something to be fucked.

[Alan Burns]

AB,

At least two and probably more, and they are "illusory" – necessarily so – as an explanation for what’s also going on under the bonnet because they are inherently irrational. That’s why you conjure up magic to get you off the hook of the binary determined vs random problem, which as even you must dimly suspect is idiotic.   

You’ve been corrected on your possible vs probable error many times now, so why repeat it here? I can envisage anything you like, but when it leads to the logical dead end of the perception of “free” choice being actually free (ie, neither determined nor random) then you’re in a world of nonsense.     

Only if you don’t think about it. When you do think about it though, you quickly realise that it’s evidence of no such thing. The only evidence this gives us is that evidence that you’re not a thinking person.

Or an honest one.

The levels of control which you espouse are illusionary only if you try to deny any possibility of non physical determinism.

You claim to be a thinking person, which I do not disagree with - but where do your thoughts originate?  What is it that drives them to reach a conclusion?  Are they entirely driven by unavoidable physical reactions?  Where do you come into the equation?

I know that I could not possibly conjure up anything if I did not have the conscious freedom to do so.  A freedom which is real - not illusionary.

[Alan Burns]

Then stop showing contempt for them, and maybe even try to find out something about them too.

And how can I possibly come to show contempt for the laws of physics if I am entirely driven by these uncontrollable laws of physics?

[Alan Burns]

'Spiritual determinism' is just an unevidenced assertion you've invented in order to make your take on 'God' appear rational - doesn't wash old chap.

No.
Spiritual determinism is essential for my take on myself to be rational.
Physical determinism renders me to have no possible control over my words, deeds or actions.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

No.
Spiritual determinism is essential for my take on myself to be rational.

Exactly!

You won't understand why, but that's very funny.

And revealing.

Physical determinism renders me to have no possible control over my words, deeds or actions.

At a deeper level of reality than you can comprehend, doesn't it though....

[torridon]

My choice is consciously determined.  It is definitely not an automated reaction over which I have no control.

No, we absolutely do not have control over our desires.  Our hopes and fears are defacto issues that guide our decision making but we do not have control over them.  When we make a choice, we are merely identifying which option appeals the most in our emotional landscape at the time.  We do not shape that landscape, such a scenario would lead to meaningless chaos in our decision making.

[torridon]

There can be no control in a physically predetermined scenario - just automated reactions.
The concept of conscious control does not exist outside human perception.

Conscious control is a concept and phenomenon at higher levels of emergence.  You are simply back in the simplistic territory of denying particle physics because you think you can make two apples touch each other.  Round and around you go, never growing or learning deeper insight into the nature of being.

[SusanDoris]

No.
Spiritual determinism is essential for my take on myself to be rational.
Physical determinism renders me to have no possible control over my words, deeds or actions.

You can kid yourself  that you are rational, although that in itself is cringe-making, but it is my opinion and that of others I think, that in fact all your posts here are evidence of irrationality, and you would do wel to take a good look at your thinking and realise that most of it expressed here is illogical, irrational, and contains elements of dishonesty.

[torridon]

The levels of control which you espouse are illusionary only if you try to deny any possibility of non physical determinism.

You claim to be a thinking person, which I do not disagree with - but where do your thoughts originate?  What is it that drives them to reach a conclusion?  Are they entirely driven by unavoidable physical reactions?  Where do you come into the equation?

I know that I could not possibly conjure up anything if I did not have the conscious freedom to do so.  A freedom which is real - not illusionary.

You could not possibly conjure anything up that was not derived from things already in your mind.  You could not recognise a tree were knowledge of trees not already in your mind.  You could not respond to these words were not knowledge of vocabulary, grammar, vocalisations already in your mind.  Could you describe what saltiness is like to someone who has never tasted salt ?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Susan,

You can kid yourself  that you are rational...

Yes – he said as much with his "Spiritual determinism is essential for my take on myself to be rational" just now. It's equivalent to someone endlessly asserting there to be pots of gold at the ends of rainbows so as to make their take on leprechauns rational. It's unintentionally both funny and revealing - if he doesn't keep asserting "spiritual", "soul" etc with his fingers tightly in his ears when those claims are dismantled the whole life defining nonsense that rests on top would collapse.

And he can't allow that at any cost.     

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

No, we absolutely do not have control over our desires.  Our hopes and fears are defacto issues that guide our decision making but we do not have control over them.  When we make a choice, we are merely identifying which option appeals the most in our emotional landscape at the time.  We do not shape that landscape, such a scenario would lead to meaningless chaos in our decision making.

Not sure what you mean by "we do not shape that landscape". We know from past experience or from information about the experiences of other people, that specific actions will lead to specific feelings, and that those feelings will influence our decisions. We can shape our emotional landscape by choosing to engage in those actions that will result in emotions that lead to what we think are better choices or decisions or experiences.

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

And how can I possibly come to show contempt for the laws of physics if I am entirely driven by these uncontrollable laws of physics?

Fairly obviously I'd have thought you can show contempt for something when the emergent property you perceive as "you" that is itself a product of biology that is in turn rooted in in the physical world has sufficient complexity to be self-aware, as indeed are various other species of the kingdom to which we belong.

Up until about a couple of hundred years ago people could be forgiven for inventing their various spirits and djinns and whatnots as you do to explain away their perceptions but those days are long gone, or at least they are for thinking people.   

[jeremyp]

The reason behind my choices is determined by my consciously driven human will. 

Indeed but what exactly is it that your consciously driven will uses to make decisions? I put it to you that you make your decisions based on information that you have about the World in which you live either directly from what your senses are telling you or from previous experience and memory or some combination of both. How your mind processes all of that information is based on its structure which is moulded by your past experience and genetics.

The above argument still works even if you try to bring a spiritual dimension into the equation. Spiritual experiences are still experiences and spiritual senses are still senses.