Searching for GOD...

[torridon]

The evidence is there in abundance for anyone who genuinely tries to find it.

Well for starters you haven't said where it is, and secondly why haven't you published it, and thirdly, why would it be hidden in the first place.  I don't believe people who can only speak in riddles like this.  Be upfront; be straight with people.

[SusanDoris]

Instead of trying to evidence anything, making shite up and saying it is fact. You are a disgrace to reason, a disgrace to logic , but most of all a disgrace to your own belief and yourself as you make so little effort to present a case that you piss on the god that you present as a psychopath.

A neat summing-up I think, and he is just like the street preachers who appear in town occasionally, talking non-stop about what Jesus does etc and who are deaf to any attempt to engage them in conversation or simply shout them down.

[torridon]

I find the expression "the option that held the most appeal" interesting.  I am intrigued to know what precisely quantifies the amount of appeal within the subconscious neural activity which you deem to be responsible for our conscious choices.

Can you 'precisely quantify an amount of appeal' ? I'm not sure how such things could be measured with much precision.  I can understand some of the relevant principles however; we cannot choose what to like and not like just as we cannot choose what to believe and to not believe and this fundamental insight is consistent with a deterministic account of mind.  Exactly why we like some things and not others is probably out of computational reach but all the evidence suggests we develop and accumulate individual preferences as we go through life and that is the way to understand why people are different, why for instance some people might become priests whilst others might become paedophiles.  Some people manage to combine both, even.

[Stranger]

And they all exist in your conscious awareness when you invoke your conscious choice.  You are consciously aware of these influences, but they alone do not determine your choice.

If they don't then that leads directly to the conclusion that some part of the choice is for no reason connected to me or choice - which would make it random.

It is my consciously invoked act of will.

That's just evasion. Why do you will one option rather than another, if all the possible influences on the choice (including your entire personality) do not decide the matter?

[Stranger]

The evidence is there in abundance for anyone who genuinely tries to find it.

You do love your baseless assertions...

[Outrider]

Do you seriously believe that your considerable consciously driven intelligence plays no part in composing your posts?

I think you're mischaracterising it - I think my intelligence had a significant part to pay in it, I just think my consciousness only became aware of the fact after it had happened.

O.

[Outrider]

The human mind has within it far more mysteries than human investigation will ever solve.

How do you arrive at that conclusion?  Why do you think that some things in nature are beyond the potential for human comprehension?

Instead of trying to analyse our amazing gift of freedom - and come up with the bizarre conclusion that it does not exist, we should be making full use of this precious gift and use it as our Creator intended - for the eternal salvation of all souls.

So many assertions, so little time - you are attempting to cite an unevidenced claim (a creator) to support your unevidenced assertion of freedom.

O.

[Outrider]

The evidence is there in abundance for anyone who genuinely tries to find it.

You realise that can be interpreted as an open admission of confirmation bias, right?  If you see the evidence only after you go in with the preconception, then there are at least significant questions about the conclusion.

O.

[SteveH]

Yes we are all 'free' to do what we want.  So is every cat, dog and pigeon.  None of us however is free to choose which wants to have.  What we do is act on the desires we have, whichever desire is uppermost gets executed.

Well, that's not true, for starters. We can train ourselves to like things we used not to (every beer drinker does so: no-one likes the taste of beer the first time they try it), and the dislike things we once liked (people who like Patience Strong, but know she's rubbish, can train themselves to like real poetry instead).

[Nearly Sane]

Well, that's not true, for starters. We can train ourselves to like things we used not to (every beer drinker does so: no-one likes the taste of beer the first time they try it), and the dislike things we once liked (people who like Patience Strong, but know she's rubbish, can train themselves to like real poetry instead).

Because they want to do it.

[bluehillside Retd.]

SteveH,

Well, that's not true, for starters. We can train ourselves to like things we used not to (every beer drinker does so: no-one likes the taste of beer the first time they try it), and the dislike things we once liked (people who like Patience Strong, but know she's rubbish, can train themselves to like real poetry instead).

Nope. The desire to train ourselves is itself a want that comes from somewhere, and the new preference is also a want. Whichever way you look at it there's no separate "you" hiding somewhere that tells the rest of you what wants to have.

[SteveH]

SteveH,

Nope. The desire to train ourselves is itself a want that comes from somewhere, and the new preference is also a want. Whichever way you look at it there's no separate "you" hiding somewhere that tells the rest of you what wants to have.

You're right, of course: I realised that even as I hit "post". I do wish, though, that you wouldn't preface your refutations with "nope".

[bluehillside Retd.]

SteveH,

You're right, of course: I realised that even as I hit "post". I do wish, though, that you wouldn't preface your refutations with "nope".

Well, if you agree then presumably your earlier posts on this subject fall away too? That is, you're now on board with the experience of "free" will being necessarily at odds wit the explanation for it?

What's wrong with nope by the way?

[SteveH]

SteveH,

Well, if you agree then presumably your earlier posts on this subject fall away too? That is, you're now on board with the experience of "free" will being necessarily at odds wit the explanation for it?

- no; we can at least choose between different wants.

What's wrong with nope by the way?

Firstly, there's no such word; and secondly, it's unnecessary.

[bluehillside Retd.]

SteveH,

- no; we can at least choose between different wants.

But the “choice” is itself a want that’s made by some process. And if you don’t think that process to be a deterministic one then either it’s random (which would be chaotic) or you just throw up your hands and claim magic (AB’s “answer”).   

Firstly, there's no such word;…

Yes there is – google “nope definition” for lots of dictionary references.

…and secondly, it's unnecessary.

No it isn’t. “Nope”, “no”, “I disagree” etc are standard constructions prior to explaining why someone has a contrary position.

[Christine]

Alan wants to credit his god for his ability to choose "the right thing", rather than his upbringing, genetics and all the other inputs he's experienced during his life.  What he doesn't acknowledge is that, having been conditioned in the way he has been, what he wants more than anything else is to believe that he's doing what his god wants.  So if he wants a choc-ice, but chooses not to have one because "the right thing to do" is give the money to charity instead, he's not denying himself.  He's doing exactly what he wants to do, which is conform to what he believes are the wants of his imaginary friend.

It's pathetic and depressing.  I don't know why, after decades of disappointment, I still hope for any credible arguments from theists at all.  I'm so desperate for there to be an explanation for life, the universe and everything, I just keep on reading.  John Stuart Mill and Thomas Paine make infinitely more sense than CS Lewis and Rob Bell, unfortunately for my peace of mind.

 

[ekim]

I don't know why, after decades of disappointment, I still hope for any credible arguments from theists at all.  I'm so desperate for there to be an explanation for life, the universe and everything, I just keep on reading.  John Stuart Mill and Thomas Paine make infinitely more sense than CS Lewis and Rob Bell, unfortunately for my peace of mind.

If you are looking for peace of mind, I doubt whether you will get it from arguments, credible or otherwise, theist or atheist.  It is more likely to result in mental agitation rather than peace.  This thread is a good example of how long that agitation can continue.  The Abrahamic religions in particular are riven by doctrinal arguments often leading to warfare.  The 'religious' mystics tend to see life as a mystery to be lived rather than a problem to be solved.

[SusanDoris]

Alan wants to credit his god for his ability to choose "the right thing", rather than his upbringing, genetics and all the other inputs he's experienced during his life.  What he doesn't acknowledge is that, having been conditioned in the way he has been, what he wants more than anything else is to believe that he's doing what his god wants.  So if he wants a choc-ice, but chooses not to have one because "the right thing to do" is give the money to charity instead, he's not denying himself.  He's doing exactly what he wants to do, which is conform to what he believes are the wants of his imaginary friend.

It's pathetic and depressing. 

And the majority of the blame belongs nowadays  far more firmly on the shoulders of those rich, powerful, (I could add words like hypocritical, but I won't!) religious leaders who ignore the objective evidence of science.

I don't know why, after decades of disappointment, I still hope for any credible arguments from theists at all.  I'm so desperate for there to be an explanation for life, the universe and everything, I just keep on reading. 

And that too is almost certainly because of the enormous weight of thousands of years of faith beliefs which will take a long time to be placed in the perspective where they belong. The internet has already speeded things up a bit but nowhere near enough yet.
Once you take the step which says, of course there isn't some magical reason, then the minute last jigsaw piece of you as a whole human slots into the gap and, wow!, you feel like a complete being. Well, I did, anyway!

John Stuart Mill and Thomas Paine make infinitely more sense than CS Lewis and Rob Bell, unfortunately for my peace of mind.

Well, try watching the video by Sean Carroll on 'the Higgs-Boson revisited. Don't try and follow all the science , simply get the gist and then follow up by reading Wonders of the Solar System etc etc by Prof Brian Cox.

[Christine]

Hi Ekim and SusanDoris, thanks for replying.

My peace of mind is disturbed by the flummoxing, to me, question of why the universe exists at all.  I'm aware of some of the amazingly interesting things discovered by scientific endeavour and I admire the people who deliver these insights.  I'd certainly rather have evidence and coherence than  unevidenced meaningless tripe, whatever the implications.

I don't feel incomplete and I enjoy my life, but I would dearly like to know what's actually going on before I die.

I've read What The Buddha Taught and I'm now meditating daily.  It's nice and I expect it's making me a nicer person.  It's not going to provide any answers, but it might help me stop thinking about the questions. 

By the way, while I might sound like one, I'm not an angst-ridden teenager 

[Nearly Sane]

By the way, while I might sound like one, I'm not an angst-ridden teenager 

In a way I suspect we all are - all men are, certainly

[Christine]

In a way I suspect we all are - all men are, certainly

 

(You'll be in trouble for generalising with a broad brush!)

[Nearly Sane]

(You'll be in trouble for generalising with a broad brush!)

Best type of brush for generalising - when you have a narrow one it's exhausting.

[Outrider]

My peace of mind is disturbed by the flummoxing, to me, question of why the universe exists at all.

Why presume there's a reason at all?  A branch falls of a tree in winter - there are causes, certainly, a chain of events that include freezing of xylem and phloem vessels, the autumnal stripping out of nutrients that leaves the wood more brittle... but is there a 'reason'?  Does 'why did the branch fall' make sense, if it's not interpreted as 'what were the physical events that led to the branch falling'.

There wasn't a decision, there wasn't a plan, there wasn't someone choosing that particular branch at that particular time - there was just physics.

Is there any reason to think that the universe, on a grander scale, wasn't exactly the same?

O.

[Alan Burns]

Alan wants to credit his god for his ability to choose "the right thing", rather than his upbringing, genetics and all the other inputs he's experienced during his life.  What he doesn't acknowledge is that, having been conditioned in the way he has been, what he wants more than anything else is to believe that he's doing what his god wants.  So if he wants a choc-ice, but chooses not to have one because "the right thing to do" is give the money to charity instead, he's not denying himself.  He's doing exactly what he wants to do, which is conform to what he believes are the wants of his imaginary friend.

I credit God with our ability to choose.
An ability which nature alone cannot give.
We are all free to choose - whether or not it is the "right" thing.

[Alan Burns]

It's pathetic and depressing.  I don't know why, after decades of disappointment, I still hope for any credible arguments from theists at all.  I'm so desperate for there to be an explanation for life, the universe and everything, I just keep on reading.  John Stuart Mill and Thomas Paine make infinitely more sense than CS Lewis and Rob Bell, unfortunately for my peace of mind.

Your quest for truth is an encouraging sign pertaining to your own spiritual nature which looks beyond what our physical senses provide and consciously seeks what lies beyond.

I personally have come to recognise that the true nature of everything is beyond human understanding and now know that the divine revelations of the New Testament are all we need for the present.