Searching for GOD...

[Gordon]

As I have said on previous posts, the third way would be our conscious awareness existing in its own present state - perceiving and interacting with our physical brain to invoke whatever is needed to implement a choice.  I believe that our conscious awareness is the only viable definition for the word "present" because that is where we exist and make our choices.  Scripture would indicate that the human soul is immortal, therefore not belonging or being part of this material world, so it would not be restricted by the time related laws of cause and effect.  Our spiritual nature would also fit in with God's nature as indicated in the awesome beginning of John's gospel - "In the beginning was the word …" - not a material thing but a meaning - a conscious intention to bring this universe into existence.

Meaningless theobabble.

[Stranger]

Please stop misrepresenting what I say.
Our choices are determined by our conscious will which has the power to choose between two or more viable options and to enable our freedom to guide our own thought processes.  It is not a reaction but a choice.  Nothing at all random.

I haven't misrepresented you. If, for once in your life, you'd bother to read and understand what has been said, you'd have seen the logic that says that, to the extent a choice is not determined by all that led up to it, it must be random. No amount of meaningless phrases like "determined by our conscious will" or "not a reaction but a choice", actually changes that logic.

I know you are not claiming it's random, but the implication of your assertions about it (minus the logically meaningless phrases), would lead to it being random. That you deny this is why your view is self-contradictory.

[Stranger]

As I have said on previous posts, the third way would be our conscious awareness existing in its own present state - perceiving and interacting with our physical brain to invoke whatever is needed to implement a choice.  I believe that our conscious awareness is the only viable definition for the word "present" because that is where we exist and make our choices.

What a magnificent piece of circular gibberish! Your get-out from the "problem" of lack of determinism being (by definition) random is to invent some alternative meaning of "present" that, without any logic or reasoning, is supposed to do the job, place "conscious awareness" inside it and then, when asked to actually say what the hell you're talking about by actually defining the "present", define it as the place conscious awareness hides to avoid the logical problem you started with.

I'd say you couldn't make it up - but you obviously did. Do you really believe this, or that it even makes the slightest bit of logical sense? I mean, seriously? If so, then.... wow! You have turned convoluted, circular, self-deceptive gibberish into high art.

[torridon]

In playing chess you are often faced with a choice of options - some with more risk than others.  It is your own conscious choice about how much risk to take.  This is where it differs from the hard programmed computer chess player which will have a pre programmed element of risk.

And please refrain from your incorrect claim that freedom to choose must be random.

So, everyone will have their own personal risk profile deriving from their past experiences, and that will feed into new choices going forward.  You cannot be free of pertinent considerations such as these without being random.  One way or another the choice is resolved and it must involve weighing the emotional content of the options against each other; risk is clearly part of that emotional content.

[Alan Burns]

So, everyone will have their own personal risk profile deriving from their past experiences, and that will feed into new choices going forward.  You cannot be free of pertinent considerations such as these without being random.  One way or another the choice is resolved and it must involve weighing the emotional content of the options against each other; risk is clearly part of that emotional content.

you mention words or phrases such as "past experiences",  "consideration" and "weighing the emotional content".  Are these not aspects of our conscious awareness?  Yet you continue to presume that our choices are predetermined within subconscious brain activity with no consideration about our current state of conscious awareness.

[torridon]

you mention words or phrases such as "past experiences",  "consideration" and "weighing the emotional content".  Are these not aspects of our conscious awareness?  Yet you continue to presume that our choices are predetermined within subconscious brain activity with no consideration about our current state of conscious awareness.

You keep confusing consciousness as referred to in its casual sense, eg awake, and consciousness as described by cognitive science in terms of autobiographical near term memory with no executive function in a strict sense.

I've never claimed our choices are 'predetermined', but rather they are 'determined' or 'resolved' through competition between rival options.  Our minds implicitly value all perceptions and higher abstract constructions with a common currency of emotional content and this provides the underlying basis that allows choices to emerge.

If you are considering which house to buy, you may be considering this over a period of months, and the neurological subtleties of a fraction of a second's consciousness lag is totally irrelevant to the resulting choice.  What is relevant, is the fact that your total life experience to date informs the choice you end up making and you cannot claim to be free of that without claiming to be random. The choice you make reflects who you have become and we cannot change the past in order to become someone else at the moment of decision.  Perhaps 3 months of deliberation over which house to buy will eventually come to a head, and that is the moment when your preference became sufficiently clear, and when you know what your preference is, you cannot just decide to find that you prefer something else instead.

[ekim]

I know a few Christians who have very different opinions about what "God" wants and expects from humans.  I think many religious people are doing exactly what they want, but (with remarkable hubris) elevating their own desires to the status of god-ordained goodness. 

That appears to be the outcome of indoctrination, I'm afraid.  It tends to create a collective ego/self with a collective will to impose itself upon other different collectives which can result in religious wars, political wars and ideological wars etc.

[ekim]

you mention words or phrases such as "past experiences",  "consideration" and "weighing the emotional content".  Are these not aspects of our conscious awareness?  Yet you continue to presume that our choices are predetermined within subconscious brain activity with no consideration about our current state of conscious awareness.

Another way of answering that question is that the memory of past experiences and intelligent consideration are aspects of the brains mental functions.  If you see them as aspects of 'conscious awareness' then your consciousness is not free from them but attached to them.  As an example, if your memory contains, say, Roman Catholic doctrine and you are emotionally attached to it then, subconsciously, it will influence your actions in the present, which means you are not free.

[Alan Burns]

Another way of answering that question is that the memory of past experiences and intelligent consideration are aspects of the brains mental functions.  If you see them as aspects of 'conscious awareness' then your consciousness is not free from them but attached to them.  As an example, if your memory contains, say, Roman Catholic doctrine and you are emotionally attached to it then, subconsciously, it will influence your actions in the present, which means you are not free.

I agree that our mind can be subjected to subconscious influences, but influences do not necessarily dictate our conscious choice.  In human beings, the past does not dictate the future.  We are all free to think and make conscious choices through our awareness which only exists and acts in the present - enabling us to consciously choose our future destiny.

[Roses]

I agree that our mind can be subjected to subconscious influences, but influences do not necessarily dictate our conscious choice.  In human beings, the past does not dictate the future.  We are all free to think and make conscious choices through our awareness which only exists and acts in the present - enabling us to consciously choose our future destiny.

Our future destiny is that we all die and more than likely stay dead, as there is no verifiable evidence to support an afterlife.

[Alan Burns]

I haven't misrepresented you. If, for once in your life, you'd bother to read and understand what has been said, you'd have seen the logic that says that, to the extent a choice is not determined by all that led up to it, it must be random. No amount of meaningless phrases like "determined by our conscious will" or "not a reaction but a choice", actually changes that logic.

I know you are not claiming it's random, but the implication of your assertions about it (minus the logically meaningless phrases), would lead to it being random. That you deny this is why your view is self-contradictory.

But the view that every event must be an inevitable reaction to previous events is blatantly contradictory to the reality of the freedom we all enjoy as members of the human race.

[Stranger]

But the view that every event must be an inevitable reaction to previous events is blatantly contradictory to the reality of the freedom we all enjoy as members of the human race.

Where is the contradiction?

[Alan Burns]

Where is the contradiction?

My freedom to choose these words of reply is a reality.
My freedom to contemplate the nature of human free will is a reality.
Your freedom to contemplate the nature of determinism is a reality.
My freedom to choose Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour is a reality.
Such freedom cannot exist within the predetermined nature of material reactions.

[Stranger]

My freedom to choose these words of reply is a reality.
My freedom to contemplate the nature of human free will is a reality.
Your freedom to contemplate the nature of determinism is a reality.

I asked where the contradiction was - not for a series of assertions.

The truth of your assertions depends entirely on the meaning of "freedom" - and there is a real, solid, logical contradiction in your definition of it.

Such freedom cannot exist within the predetermined nature of material reactions.

Another evidence- and reasoning-free assertion.

[Alan Burns]

I'd say you couldn't make it up - ….

You are quite correct in this assumption.  I could not have made it up - nor could anyone else.  I am just describing what I perceive to be God's miraculous gift of free will.

[Stranger]

You are quite correct in this assumption.  I could not have made it up - nor could anyone else.  I am just describing what I perceive to be God's miraculous gift of free will.

But it is literally meaningless. You have invented a notion of the "present" that is supposed (I assume) to be an escape from determinism without introducing randomness. Unfortunately, this is logically impossible, so when pushed for a definition, you defined it in a circular way (as where consciousness exists).

It's circular, self-referential gobbledygook. A magnificent example of illogical confusion.

You might as well have just made up a word and said something like:

"Consciousness is not deterministic and involves no randomness because of wigjaffih."
"What's wigjaffih, then?"
"It's how consciousness is not deterministic and involves no randomness."

Or even:

"Square circles can exist because of wigjaffih."
"What's wigjaffih, then?"
"It's where square circles can exist."

What you've said makes exactly that much sense....

[torridon]

My freedom to choose these words of reply is a reality.
My freedom to contemplate the nature of human free will is a reality.
Your freedom to contemplate the nature of determinism is a reality.
My freedom to choose Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour is a reality.
Such freedom cannot exist within the predetermined nature of material reactions.

In so far as those are valid freedoms, then also the following are equally valid :

A robin's freedom to choose its nesting site is a reality.
A badgers's freedom to choose its set is a reality.
A penhen's freedom to choose a mate is a reality.
..
..

[ekim]

I agree that our mind can be subjected to subconscious influences, but influences do not necessarily dictate our conscious choice.  In human beings, the past does not dictate the future.  We are all free to think and make conscious choices through our awareness which only exists and acts in the present - enabling us to consciously choose our future destiny.

You are spinning words here by  changing 'influence' to 'dictatorship'.  Whether the influence is subconscious and based upon past experiences or based upon current circumstances, which you call the present, you are not free from them, neither are you free from  your imagination of a  future destiny as you are not yet aware of the actuality of the circumstances which may confront you.  As regards your last sentence, similarly, your conscious choices are not free from thought.  Also, your replies on this board exhibit a generous attachment to self will rather than a surrender to your God's Will.

[Alan Burns]

In so far as those are valid freedoms, then also the following are equally valid :

A robin's freedom to choose its nesting site is a reality.
A badgers's freedom to choose its set is a reality.
A penhen's freedom to choose a mate is a reality.
..
..

You totally missed the point.
The human freedoms I illustrated were concerning our freedom to think, to contemplate and to draw conclusions.  These in no way can be compared to observed animal behaviour.

[Gordon]

You totally missed the point.
The human freedoms I illustrated were concerning our freedom to think, to contemplate and to draw conclusions.  These in no way can be compared to observed animal behaviour.

Don't be silly: of course it can since we too are a species of animal, and while our evolutionary history sees us having certain attributes other animal species have certain attributes too - some similar to our species, and others very different.

You're being species-ist.

[Alan Burns]

But it is literally meaningless. You have invented a notion of the "present" that is supposed (I assume) to be an escape from determinism without introducing randomness. Unfortunately, this is logically impossible, so when pushed for a definition, you defined it in a circular way (as where consciousness exists).

It's circular, self-referential gobbledygook. A magnificent example of illogical confusion.

You might as well have just made up a word and said something like:

"Consciousness is not deterministic and involves no randomness because of wigjaffih."
"What's wigjaffih, then?"
"It's how consciousness is not deterministic and involves no randomness."

Or even:

"Square circles can exist because of wigjaffih."
"What's wigjaffih, then?"
"It's where square circles can exist."

What you've said makes exactly that much sense....

So can you illustrate how conscious awareness can be determined from material reactions?

[Stranger]

So can you illustrate how conscious awareness can be determined from material reactions?

• So you're not even going to try to justify the circular gobbledygook? You'd rather just change the subject?
  
  
• Can you illustrate how conscious awareness can be "determined" by any means?
  
  
• For about the 10 millionth time: my argument doesn't assume "material means" - it's simply irrelevant whether the mind is material or not.

[Alan Burns]

For about the 10 millionth time: my argument doesn't assume "material means" - it's simply irrelevant whether the mind is material or not.

You have said this many times, but you can't presume to know that anything non material is subject to the same time dependent endless chains of cause and effect we perceive in material entities.  The evidence apparent in our human freedom is a clear indication that our consciously controlled thoughts, words and actions are not just inevitable, uncontrollable reactions to past events.

[Alan Burns]

Can you illustrate how conscious awareness can be "determined" by any means?

Conscious awareness is perceived, not determined.

[Stranger]

You have said this many times, but you can't presume to know that anything non material is subject to the same time dependent endless chains of cause and effect we perceive in material entities.

And you have said this many times too - you should be able to write my answer for yourself, so why do you persist in this pointless repetition?

Either the mind is functioning in a logically self-consistent way, or we just have to give up. In a world where square circles can exist, there can be no evidence or reasoning about it.

The evidence apparent in our human freedom is a clear indication that our consciously controlled thoughts, words and actions are not just inevitable, uncontrollable reactions to past events.

This is simply false.

Conscious awareness is perceived, not determined.

You used the term, which is why I put it in scare quotes - because I wasn't sure what you were talking about. I'm still not.