Searching for GOD...

[BeRational]

As always, your own logical assessment of reality breaks down with your concluding paragraph - where you show undeniable evidence of your own freedom to guide your own thoughts in your deliberate attempts to falsify the logic behind this freedom.  And you reinforce this error by accusing me of deliberately refusing to look at things from your materialistic viewpoint.  A personally driven deliberation which is not possible in a physically predetermined scenario.

Round and round we go, scream if you want to go faster.
More logic free assertions

[bluehillside Retd.]

AB,

As always, your own logical assessment of reality breaks down with your concluding paragraph - where you show undeniable evidence of your own freedom to guide your own thoughts in your deliberate attempts to falsify the logic behind this freedom.  And you reinforce this error by accusing me of deliberately refusing to look at things from your materialistic viewpoint.  A personally driven deliberation which is not possible in a physically predetermined scenario.

First, I just took the time to explain to you in very simple terms why your assertions about prayer are logically false. I also said that you just ignore the falsifications you're given, so will never see where "your" logic fails. Why then have you yet again just ignored this falsification as I said you would?

Second, as you know well because it's been explained to you some 37,856,241 times already, your schtick about "undeniable freedom" is utter, pant-wetting, buttock-clenching, mind numbing, complete bollocks. Just pretending that it hasn't been falsified countless times so you can eructate it like a speak your weight machine stuck on repeat is profoundly dishonest behaviour. I know that you think telling lies for Jesus is well and good, but those of us more capable of thinking than you find it disgraceful.     

[Sebastian Toe]

As always, your own logical assessment of reality breaks down with your concluding paragraph - where you show undeniable evidence of your own freedom to guide your own thoughts in your deliberate attempts to falsify the logic behind this freedom.  And you reinforce this error by accusing me of deliberately refusing to look at things from your materialistic viewpoint.  A personally driven deliberation which is not possible in a physically predetermined scenario.

Thank you, for once more demonstrating  an example of the workings of a biological brain making choices entirely under deterministic principles with no magic, logic free, fantasy ridden soul required.

[Enki]

As always, your own logical assessment of reality breaks down with your concluding paragraph - where you show undeniable evidence of your own freedom to guide your own thoughts in your deliberate attempts to falsify the logic behind this freedom.  And you reinforce this error by accusing me of deliberately refusing to look at things from your materialistic viewpoint.  A personally driven deliberation which is not possible in a physically predetermined scenario.

I know that you are replying to Blue here, but I assume I am included in the idea that I also have the freedom to guide my own thoughts. Of course I do. That has never been in dispute. I obviously have the power or right to act, speak, or think as I want. The problem always comes when you are asked to explain how we arrive at what we want. Unless it is as the result of a deterministic system, then it has to be random. You have never faced this logic or come up with an alternative(the soul idea has to follow the same logic). It doesn't matter whether it is materialistic or soul driven, the logic still applies.

So please stop suggesting that I am denying my own freedom to control my own thought processes.(reply 35787) This just isn't true. I have never denied this.

[Stranger]

I find this to be blatantly untrue, because you have posted many words to say why you find fault with my logical deductions.

No, I have not. I have posted many words pointing out that you have not posted anything logical. I have never once seen you post anything remotely resembling a properly constructed logical deduction.

What you post is a catalogue of textbook fallacies, baseless assertions, and statements of blind faith.

[Stranger]

As always, your own logical assessment of reality breaks down with your concluding paragraph - where you show undeniable evidence of your own freedom to guide your own thoughts in your deliberate attempts to falsify the logic behind this freedom.  And you reinforce this error by accusing me of deliberately refusing to look at things from your materialistic viewpoint.  A personally driven deliberation which is not possible in a physically predetermined scenario.

Here we go again...
 
Nobody is denying what we all experience (being able to think about things, come to conclusions, and post what we want). IT IS A LIE to claim that people are arguing against that. IT IS A LIE to pretend that our experience of these things is evidence for your self-contradictory, nonsense version of freedom.

[Alan Burns]

 it's been explained to you some 37,856,241 times already, your schtick about "undeniable freedom" is utter, pant-wetting, buttock-clenching, mind numbing, complete bollocks. Just pretending that it hasn't been falsified countless times  .....

But can you not see the obvious contradiction that every time you consciously choose to explain how this "undeniable freedom" is just a product of physical reactions in your brain, you hand over control of your brain to the laws of physics with no freedom to make the choice you just made.  Your attempt at falsification falls at the first hurdle because you are denying yourself the freedom to consciously falsify anything.

[BeRational]

But can you not see the obvious contradiction that every time you consciously choose to explain how this "undeniable freedom" is just a product of physical reactions in your brain, you hand over control of your brain to the laws of physics with no freedom to make the choice you just made.  Your attempt at falsification falls at the first hurdle because you are denying yourself the freedom to consciously falsify anything.

Please stop posting this lie.
It has been pointed out so many times you are becoming an embarrassment

[Alan Burns]

Here we go again...
 
Nobody is denying what we all experience (being able to think about things, come to conclusions, and post what we want). IT IS A LIE to claim that people are arguing against that. IT IS A LIE to pretend that our experience of these things is evidence for your self-contradictory, nonsense version of freedom.

But in order to commit a deliberate lie, I would need the conscious freedom to choose to do so.  Such freedom cannot possibly exist within physically driven chains of cause and effect reactions in which there can be no definitive causal event.

[BeRational]

But in order to commit a deliberate lie, I would need the conscious freedom to choose to do so.  Such freedom cannot possibly exist within physically driven chains of cause and effect reactions in which there can be no definitive causal event.

Repeated baseless assertions.

Please stop repeating what has been answered

[torridon]

But can you not see the obvious contradiction that every time you consciously choose to explain how this "undeniable freedom" is just a product of physical reactions in your brain, you hand over control of your brain to the laws of physics with no freedom to make the choice you just made.  Your attempt at falsification falls at the first hurdle because you are denying yourself the freedom to consciously falsify anything.

I am writing this post now, not because I am free to do so, I am writing it because I want to do so. 'Freedom' is only relevant if i am writing in a context where peoples desires are oppressed.  Maybe if I was in North Korea I would not be free to write this.  Your notion that we can be 'free' to choose which desires to have is a nonsense.

[ekim]

The problem always comes when you are asked to explain how we arrive at what we want. Unless it is as the result of a deterministic system, then it has to be random. You have never faced this logic or come up with an alternative(the soul idea has to follow the same logic). It doesn't matter whether it is materialistic or soul driven, the logic still applies.

I think the Christian approach has a slightly different 'logic' where 'random' does not feature.  The choice is between two deterministic systems.  One is based upon self centred desires or self will and the other God centred desires or God's Will.  Self sacrifice results in alignment with the latter, 'Thy Will be done' not my will.

[Stranger]

But in order to commit a deliberate lie, I would need the conscious freedom to choose to do so.  Such freedom cannot possibly exist within physically driven chains of cause and effect reactions in which there can be no definitive causal event.

Baseless assertion (again). Perfect illustration of the point about "logical deductions". A baseless assertion like this has nothing to do with logic; you are just asserting that something is the case. You have provided no premises that people can agree on, and no valid reasoning.

[Sebastian Toe]

But in order to commit a deliberate lie, I would need the conscious freedom to choose to do so.  Such freedom cannot possibly exist within physically driven chains of cause and effect reactions in which there can be no definitive causal event.

Thank you for demonstrating  the workings of a biological brain making choices entirely under deterministic principles with no magic, logic free, fantasy ridden soul required.

[Alan Burns]

I am writing this post now, not because I am free to do so, I am writing it because I want to do so. 'Freedom' is only relevant if i am writing in a context where peoples desires are oppressed.  Maybe if I was in North Korea I would not be free to write this.  Your notion that we can be 'free' to choose which desires to have is a nonsense.

But our freedom to choose is not just a freedom from external constraints - it is internal freedom to consciously choose what we do, think or say.  And your deliberate attempts to deny this freedom would not be possible without your freedom to consciously control and manipulate your own thought processes.  Can you not see that every post we make is deliberately composed by our conscious self - it is not just an inevitable consequence of physically determined brain activity.

[Alan Burns]

Repeated baseless assertions.

Please stop repeating what has been answered

If the answers were true, I would have no conscious freedom to repeatedly point out the error in those answers.  My so called assertions are simply a statement of the fact that I am free to consciously choose to write this post.

[Stranger]

If the answers were true, I would have no conscious freedom to repeatedly point out the error in those answers.

This is a lie.

My so called assertions are simply a statement of the fact that I am free to consciously choose to write this post.

Nobody is denying your ability to do this. Stop lying.

[Alan Burns]

Baseless assertion (again). Perfect illustration of the point about "logical deductions". A baseless assertion like this has nothing to do with logic; you are just asserting that something is the case. You have provided no premises that people can agree on, and no valid reasoning.

And where do you think this so called baseless assertion originates?  Was it just an inevitable consequence of physically controlled brain activity?  I know I have asked this several times before, but the attempts to explain it comprise convoluted mental gymnastics which would not be possible if we did not have the consciously driven freedom needed to fabricate such explanations.

[Roses]

And where do you think this so called baseless assertion originates?  Was it just an inevitable consequence of physically controlled brain activity?  I know I have asked this several times before, but the attempts to explain it comprise convoluted mental gymnastics which would not be possible if we did not have the consciously driven freedom needed to fabricate such explanations.

The RCC is good at indoctrination.

[Stranger]

And where do you think this so called baseless assertion originates?  Was it just an inevitable consequence of physically controlled brain activity?

There is no 'just' about it. We are all amazing, self-conscious, thinking, deliberating beings. However, that cannot possibly be explained by your self-contradictory, impossible nonsense. There is no such thing as a square triangle and your nonsense version of 'freedom' is just as self-contradictory.

I know I have asked this several times before, but the attempts to explain it comprise convoluted mental gymnastics which would not be possible if we did not have the consciously driven freedom needed to fabricate such explanations.

Nobody is denying that we have the "consciously driven freedom needed to fabricate such explanations" - your repeated claims that we are denying what we all experience are totally dishonest.

[Enki]

I think the Christian approach has a slightly different 'logic' where 'random' does not feature.  The choice is between two deterministic systems.  One is based upon self centred desires or self will and the other God centred desires or God's Will.  Self sacrifice results in alignment with the latter, 'Thy Will be done' not my will.

Ekim,

It really doesn't matter what the so called Christian approach is, you have totally missed the point.

Whether you choose 'God's will' or 'my will' you still have to choose. The logic comes in the act of choosing, which has to be the result of a deterministic system or is purely random. Unfortunately Alan does not accept that it is a deterministic system and also rejects the idea of randomness in this context. Yet he can put nothing in its place. All he is left with is endless 'can you  not see...' type statements and bald assertions which are frankly useless as arguments.

[torridon]

But our freedom to choose is not just a freedom from external constraints - it is internal freedom to consciously choose what we do, think or say.  And your deliberate attempts to deny this freedom would not be possible without your freedom to consciously control and manipulate your own thought processes.  Can you not see that every post we make is deliberately composed by our conscious self - it is not just an inevitable consequence of physically determined brain activity.

We are not free to choose which thoughts to think.  We think the thoughts that come to us.  And even if we were free to choose our thoughts, that still would not provide a pathway to being able to want something you don't want.  It gets you no further forward.

[BeRational]

If the answers were true, I would have no conscious freedom to repeatedly point out the error in those answers.  My so called assertions are simply a statement of the fact that I am free to consciously choose to write this post.

Baseless assertion and logic free.

[BeRational]

We are not free to choose which thoughts to think.  We think the thoughts that come to us.  And even if we were free to choose our thoughts, that still would not provide a pathway to being able to want something you don't want.  It gets you no further forward.

He knows this as I can recall it being mentioned many times now.

He only wants to preach, this is not a discussion.

[Alan Burns]

There is no 'just' about it. We are all amazing, self-conscious, thinking, deliberating beings. However, that cannot possibly be explained by your self-contradictory, impossible nonsense. There is no such thing as a square triangle and your nonsense version of 'freedom' is just as self-contradictory.

Nobody is denying that we have the "consciously driven freedom needed to fabricate such explanations" - your repeated claims that we are denying what we all experience are totally dishonest.

But the concepts of consciously driven freedom and physically determined brain activity are incompatible.  The explanations given on this thread are that our apparent choices are determined within  subconscious brain activity before we are consciously aware of the choice - which denies us the freedom to make consciously driven choices.