Free Will

[jahannam]

Originally posted by patlajan Ooops I'm sorry, I thought the title of this thread was "Free Willy" excuse me....

hahahhahhahahhahhahahhahahhahahhaahahahhahah

[loseyourname]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Free Will

Originally posted by Anonymouse Biology cannot answer ethereal and spiritual domains. You admitted that you believe in a soul, yet you cannot prove that with the scientific method. Like I said, faith begins where reason ends.

Decision-making is not a spiritual matter. Decision making takes place in the brain, which is quite material and quite studyable. I never said I believed in a soul, either. I just said that I didn't disbelieve in it. I certainly feel some form of a human spirit, but whether or not that translates into any form of individual awareness without the presence of a physical body I don't know. I don't see how any of us could know.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Free Will

Originally posted by loseyourname And?

I suppose that would be kind of liberating, but that isn't what I said. I just said that we can't know. As our knowledge of human biology increases, and we gain some working knowledge of the exact nature of consciousness and decision-making, then maybe we can say. Until then, it's fun to speculate, but I will speak with no authority.

Biology cannot answer ethereal and spiritual domains. You admitted that you believe in a soul, yet you cannot prove that with the scientific method. Like I said, faith begins where reason ends.

Like I told you before, it is only a philosophical assumption that all knowledge comes from the material world and what you can observe. How that in itself got to be there science cannot answer.

[loseyourname]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Free Will

Originally posted by Anonymouse So if you say there is no free will, I guess what you just said is in accordance with the prophecy.

And?

I suppose that would be kind of liberating, but that isn't what I said. I just said that we can't know. As our knowledge of human biology increases, and we gain some working knowledge of the exact nature of consciousness and decision-making, then maybe we can say. Until then, it's fun to speculate, but I will speak with no authority.

[Arvestaked]

Originally posted by Anonymouse Um, I think me and bejug know what agreed upon, as opposed to your personal opinion.

Like I said, I you had, l.y.n. probably would not have continued to argue with you.

[Anonymouse]

Um, I think me and bejug know what agreed upon, as opposed to your personal opinion.

[Arvestaked]

Originally posted by Anonymouse Well thats what me and CKbejug agreed upon, the free will within the basic system.

No you did not. You tried to credit it beyon that point. If you had, the arguement would have stopped. I could be opening up a can of worms here but you are all arguing the validity of a concept who's definition you have not agreed on.

[Anonymouse]

Well thats what me and CKbejug agreed upon, the free will within the basic system.

[Arvestaked]

Originally posted by Anonymouse I guess the adamant position of loseyourname and Arvestaked seems to seal the case for them, no free will. Their thoughts are not a product of them, just some "laws". I think there is alot of confusion as to how we define free will. Will that is free from physical input. When I say is free I mean will free from causality purely random and unpredictable. Even you in your everyday lives, the two of you that deny free will, cannot deny ever using the expression of damn that was random. Random will, is in other words, the ability to choose completely independent of any cause. By this definition a photon has free will. Experimentally, at a slit a photon may choose to go right or left and no one can know which way it will go before it does. Indeed, why do we even bother using "choice" in our vernacular or "volition". If all is hopeless, one wonders why the words exist. But God still loves you. He loves me and I'm missing chromosomes.

I denied the credibility of defining such a concept.

Entropy is predictable. And free will can exist within the confines of the very credible laws of physics.

It is inconsequential.

[Anonymouse]

I guess the adamant position of loseyourname and Arvestaked seems to seal the case for them, no free will. Their thoughts are not a product of them, just some "laws". I think there is alot of confusion as to how we define free will. Will that is free from physical input. When I say is free I mean will free from causality purely random and unpredictable. Even you in your everyday lives, the two of you that deny free will, cannot deny ever using the expression of damn that was random. Random will, is in other words, the ability to choose completely independent of any cause. By this definition a photon has free will. Experimentally, at a slit a photon may choose to go right or left and no one can know which way it will go before it does. Indeed, why do we even bother using "choice" in our vernacular or "volition". If all is hopeless, one wonders why the words exist. But God still loves you. He loves me and I'm missing chromosomes.