Searching for GOD...

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

The way it seems to me, our conscious awareness is a particular form of 'feedback loop' from our subconscious - the bits that we're aware of are a partial echo of things that are happening deeper in our brain, in advance of us becoming conscious of them.  If, therefore, we become aware of a conflict within our thinking, it's because those concepts are being balanced somewhere in our subconscious; once that process is finished, we become aware of what we've decided, but it's still happening at a subconscious level.  It might be that the conscious feedback element of it somehow tips a balance somewhere, but that conscious element is another deterministic piece of brain activity, it's no more free of the laws of physics than any other part of our thinking.

So say for example I have a desire to do something and I (my brain) becomes consciously aware of this desire and also consciously aware that there are social or cultural or evolutionary ethical reasons why my desire is considered ethically "bad" - do you think the decision to obey that code of ethics by removing myself from the opportunity to act on my desire is a manifestation of a subconscious desire to obey the code of ethics that was stronger than my desire to act on my "unethical" desire? And my brain's considerations of the reasons why my desire is considered undesirable from a social/ cultural/ evolutionary perspective influences my sub-conscious desires?

What differentiates an emotional thought from others?

Good question. Thoughts that result in our limbic system showing lots of neural activity? Though I don't know yet what type of thoughts don't show lots of neural activity in the limbic system. Perhaps someone can enlighten me?

My eldest finished Philosophy and Ethics at Chichester - all it seemed to do for him was reinforce his need for specificity in definitions of words and expand his vocabulary a little more  As for the 'Ethics' part, I'm not saying that he failed, or it's not fit for purpose, but he seems intent on voting Tory in December... 

O.

Haha - yes the expansion of vocabulary is useful I think. But the exposure to new and conflicting ideas about why we think what we think or believe what we believe and putting it together logically in an essay seems useful in the current climate of polarised opinions. I really enjoy her telling me about some of her essay questions. The French part of the degree is so she can travel - so hopefully that will be useful.

[Alan Burns]

Hi Gabriella,

In reply to #37644,

The Roman Catholic understanding I have is that God will never override a person's freedom to choose.  We can pray for discernment to do the right thing, and God will answer that prayer by guidance, not by force.  All feasible options for a conscious choice will exist in our conscious awareness before invoking the choice, and these will usually include a sense of what is the right thing to do as well as knowledge of the wrong thing.  This sense of right and wrong may well be God's guidance in answer to prayer.  But the final choice is down to our own conscious ability to choose, and often we succumb to temptation to do what we know is the wrong thing for self centred reasons.

[Outrider]

So say for example I have a desire to do something and I (my brain) becomes consciously aware of this desire and also consciously aware that there are social or cultural or evolutionary ethical reasons why my desire is considered ethically "bad" - do you think the decision to obey that code of ethics by removing myself from the opportunity to act on my desire is a manifestation of a subconscious desire to obey the code of ethics that was stronger than my desire to act on my "unethical" desire?

I think it's always a manifestation of a subconscious desire/decision - the conscious awareness of that decision happens after the neural processing to make the decision has happened, so logically it has to be subconscious.

And my brain's considerations of the reasons why my desire is considered undesirable from a social/ cultural/ evolutionary perspective influences my sub-conscious desires?

They are, themselves, echoes of subconscious activity.

Good question. Thoughts that result in our limbic system showing lots of neural activity? Though I don't know yet what type of thoughts don't show lots of neural activity in the limbic system. Perhaps someone can enlighten me?

I suspect we'd eventually narrow in on a definition that referenced the link between thoughts in regions of the brain that prompt particular (or particularly large?) hormonal responses, but I think given the nature of those that it's always going to be a somewhat arbitrary point on a spectrum to decide one side of that point is 'emotional' and that side is 'emotionless'.

O.

[Roses]

Hi Gabriella,

In reply to #37644,

The Roman Catholic understanding I have is that God will never override a person's freedom to choose.  We can pray for discernment to do the right thing, and God will answer that prayer by guidance, not by force.  All feasible options for a conscious choice will exist in our conscious awareness before invoking the choice, and these will usually include a sense of what is the right thing to do as well as knowledge of the wrong thing.  This sense of right and wrong may well be God's guidance in answer to prayer.  But the final choice is down to our own conscious ability to choose, and often we succumb to temptation to do what we know is the wrong thing for self centred reasons.

The RCC is wrong about so many things, therefore I would treat the teaching of that church with a crate of salt.

[torridon]

As you have stated many times, your choice will be dictated by what most appeals to you.
But the quantity of and quality of appeal is a consciously perceived value.  It is not just a subconscious reaction which pops into your conscious awareness.  You along with others on this forum have concluded that subconscious brain activity must dictate our choices before we are consciously aware of them.  You can't reconcile these two views.

The subtleties of consciousness lag make little difference to the logic of choice. Even if your awareness of what your preference is does follow a split second after it is resolved or not, you still cannot prefer something you don't prefer, and the resolution of that preference cannot be free of determining reasons without being random.  It doesn't make any sense. Being free of determining reasons means being random.

[Alan Burns]

The subtleties of consciousness lag make little difference to the logic of choice. Even if your awareness of what your preference is does follow a split second after it is resolved or not, you still cannot prefer something you don't prefer, and the resolution of that preference cannot be free of determining reasons without being random.  It doesn't make any sense.

As I have repeated many times, our choices are not free of determining reasons.  Reasons for choice exist in our conscious awareness at the time we make the choice. Consciously held reasons do not dictate the choice, they help us choose.  But I still fail to see how you can reconcile your view that choices are made by subconscious brain activity before we are consciously aware of them, because this would remove the possibility of being able to use our conscious ability to asses qualitative value to any choice.

[Stranger]

As I have repeated many times, our choices are not free of determining reasons.  Reasons for choice exist in our conscious awareness at the time we make the choice. Consciously held reasons do not dictate the choice, they help us choose.

More evasive nonsense. If a reason "exists in our conscious awareness at the time we make the choice", it either got there entirely because of all the events that led up to it, or it didn't. If not, that means that some part of the reasons for the reason is entirely unconnected to all the things that led up to it (random).

You can make up nonsense phrases about "the present" or "at the time" as much as you like - it doesn't make a jot of difference to the basic logic. Either the past and the unfolding events that led up to a choice fully determine it or not - and if not, there is only randomness as an alternative.

[Alan Burns]

More evasive nonsense. If a reason "exists in our conscious awareness at the time we make the choice", it either got there entirely because of all the events that led up to it, or it didn't. If not, that means that some part of the reasons for the reason is entirely unconnected to all the things that led up to it (random).

You can make up nonsense phrases about "the present" or "at the time" as much as you like - it doesn't make a jot of difference to the basic logic. Either the past and the unfolding events that led up to a choice fully determine it or not - and if not, there is only randomness as an alternative.

And how would I get the ability to consciously choose to "make up nonsense phrases" as you put it?  Do I have the power to stop making up nonsense phrases?  If so, where would that power be initiated from?  Your short sighted logic offers no opportunity whatever for what comprises "me" to intercede with physically predetermined cause and effect events dating back to before I was born.

[Outrider]

And how would I get the ability to consciously choose to "make up nonsense phrases" as you put it?

As it's being depicted in this thread, you wouldn't.

Do I have the power to stop making up nonsense phrases?  If so, where would that power be initiated from?

The power, yes, but not the choice over whether to apply it.

Your short sighted logic offers no opportunity whatever for what comprises "me" to intercede with physically predetermined cause and effect events dating back to before I was born.

What makes you think there is a 'you' outside of the physically deterministic brain patterns that are a result of the various exposures your body has had while you've been piloting it?

O.

[Stranger]

And how would I get the ability to consciously choose to "make up nonsense phrases" as you put it?

You're human.

Do I have the power to stop making up nonsense phrases?

Yes. Whether you have the inclination is another matter.

If so, where would that power be initiated from?

Your mind.

Your short sighted logic offers no opportunity whatever for what comprises "me" to intercede with physically predetermined cause and effect events dating back to before I was born.

There you go assuming your conclusion again. You are simply assuming that "you" is somehow separate from cause and effect - which would actually make you the product of total randomness.

So, how about you stop mindlessly repeating your tired and empty script and try actually thinking about what is being said to you? Yes, you can choose to do that. You have all the power to choose that you can possibly have, you just don't have the logically impossible, self-contradictory non-power that you seem to want, as if it even made sense.

[ippy]

Hi Gabriella,

In reply to #37644,

The Roman Catholic understanding I have is that God will never override a person's freedom to choose.  We can pray for discernment to do the right thing, and God will answer that prayer by guidance, not by force.  All feasible options for a conscious choice will exist in our conscious awareness before invoking the choice, and these will usually include a sense of what is the right thing to do as well as knowledge of the wrong thing.  This sense of right and wrong may well be God's guidance in answer to prayer.  But the final choice is down to our own conscious ability to choose, and often we succumb to temptation to do what we know is the wrong thing for self centred reasons.

Does this post of yours mean you're taking on the direction of the R C C without using your free will to think things out for yourself Alan?

Commiserations to you Alan, ippy.

[Alan Burns]

Quote from: Alan Burns on Today at 04:00:58 PM

    If so, where would that power be initiated from?

Your mind.

Presumably you consider my mind to be just a piece of material controlled by predetermined chains of cause and effect.
So please explain how the power to stop making up nonsense phrases can be initiated.
Where does this power come from?

[Alan Burns]

Does this post of yours mean you're taking on the direction of the R C C without using your free will to think things out for yourself Alan?

Commiserations to you Alan, ippy.

I have the freedom to choose whether or not to follow Jesus by accepting the teachings of his appointed church.

[torridon]

I have the freedom to choose whether or not to follow Jesus by accepting the teachings of his appointed church.

But you don't have the freedom to choose whether to find it convincing or not.  So what happens to people who don't find it convincing ? 

[torridon]

As I have repeated many times, our choices are not free of determining reasons.  Reasons for choice exist in our conscious awareness at the time we make the choice. Consciously held reasons do not dictate the choice, they help us choose.  But I still fail to see how you can reconcile your view that choices are made by subconscious brain activity before we are consciously aware of them, because this would remove the possibility of being able to use our conscious ability to asses qualitative value to any choice.

Try putting a slice of durian fruit in your mouth.  Nice ?  Do you like it, or not ?

We don't get to choose such things, they impact upon us individually and we discover whether we like it or not.  We cannot choose to like it.

This is a simple example, but all choice must resolve this way, eventually, we weigh up the alternatives and we identify which one we like the most, which is not something we have any control over.  Try writing an If-Then-Else statement where the condition might be indeterminate.  As a programmer, you would know, this is a logical construct doomed and so would we be if our minds had no way to resolve choice one way or the other.

[Alan Burns]

Try putting a slice of durian fruit in your mouth.  Nice ?  Do you like it, or not ?

We don't get to choose such things, they impact upon us individually and we discover whether we like it or not.  We cannot choose to like it.

Our likes and dislikes are not a choice.  We have covered this several times before.

This is a simple example, but all choice must resolve this way, eventually, we weigh up the alternatives and we identify which one we like the most, which is not something we have any control over.  Try writing an If-Then-Else statement where the condition might be indeterminate.  As a programmer, you would know, this is a logical construct doomed and so would we be if our minds had no way to resolve choice one way or the other.

Computer programs have no self awareness, so no capacity to make conscious choices.
My mind is not a computer.  It is me.  I have the freedom to consciously choose my thoughts, words and actions regardless of my likes and dislikes.

[Alan Burns]

But you don't have the freedom to choose whether to find it convincing or not.  So what happens to people who don't find it convincing ?

They have the freedom to look beyond their initial reactions to find deeper revelations, or not bother.

And there are some who have discovered the truth in Christianity, but still choose to reject it.  I have come across a definition of a sinner as one who loves evil rather than good.

[Nearly Sane]

They have the freedom to look beyond their initial reactions to find deeper revelations, or not bother.

And there are some who have discovered the truth in Christianity, but still choose to reject it.  I have come across a definition of a sinner as oncallunge who loves evil rather than good.

calling LR a liar again.

[Alan Burns]

calling LR a liar again.

I have a great admiration for LR
Why would I call her a liar?

[Nearly Sane]

I have a great admiration for LR
Why would I call her a liar?

I don't know, why do you so frequently? You think if people ask god he appears. LR has frequently posted that isn't the case for her.  So you are calling her a liar. Just like you call all.atheists on here liars.

[Alan Burns]

I don't know, why do you so frequently? You think if people ask god he appears. LR has frequently posted that isn't the case for her.  So you are calling her a liar. Just like you call all.atheists on here liars.

Mistaken, confused, delusioned perhaps but not liars.
I have encouraged LR not to give up seeking God.
I would encourage anyone not to give up.
We have just one lifetime to find Him.
I pray you will one day.
Keep searching and you will find Him.

[Walter]

Mistaken, confused, delusioned perhaps but not liars.
I have encouraged LR not to give up seeking God.
I would encourage anyone not to give up.
We have just one lifetime to find Him.
I pray you will one day.
Keep searching and you will find Him.

alan
Were you born like this or did something happen to you ?

[Steve H]

On R&E forum, it's news
That this thread's had two million views,
But it never gets quite
Past the same tired old shite -
It's enough to drive sane folk to booze.

[Nearly Sane]

Mistaken, confused, delusioned perhaps but not liars.
I have encouraged LR not to give up seeking God.
I would encourage anyone not to give up.
We have just one lifetime to find Him.
I pray you will one day.
Keep searching and you will find Him.

'Delusioned'?  So someone prayed to your god and it then 'delusions' them? You portray your god as a psychopathic child.

[SusanDoris]

Your mind.

Presumably you consider my mind to be just a piece of material controlled

As soon as you use the word 'controlled', you are assuming and asserting a controller, but if only you could get your mind to realise - onits own, no outside controller, no mystical something pumping information into it, etc etc - the more likely you are to come to a rational conclusion that that is the way minds have evolved - to enable the person in whose head it is to function in the best way possible.

I don't hold any hope of that happening in my lifetime though!