Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Where Do Moral Questions Stop?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by seer View Post
    Tass you keep missing what epiphenomenalism actually is. Our conscious thoughts and reasoning play no causal role in the mental process. They don't do anything - they are merely by products of the physical processes.
    Your thoughts and reasoning play a role, but consciousness, according to Libets experiment, doesn't seem to play a role. You are not conscious of the decisions you make until miliseconds after the unconscious brain makes them.



    No the question is why would the chemicals in my brain decide on Aug.19 1990 to cause me to go from being an agnostic to being a Christian. After all I had no choice in the matter if you guys are right.
    Because chemicals are not just chemicals. Again the way that you seem to think about it is that your brain is just a blob of irrelevent matter that just sits there and does nothing. All that you know about the world and life is stored as information in those chemicals, and the brain as a whole functions as an information processer. So, if there is an immaterial conscious entity, an entity distinct from the physical body, an entity that thinks for itself, then how would you describe it and how does it function of itself as well as interact with and move the physical body and brain. Your answer seems to be, "I don't know, I have no idea, but for some reason I just believe it." Its just an intuitive feeling, but a lot of things feel right to us, but are completely wrong. It doesn't feel as though we are traveling thousands of miles an hour through space, but the empirical evidence shows our intuitive feelings about that to be wrong. If someone who didn't know any better asked for an explanation for that you could explain it via the emprical evidence, but for your free willed ghost in the machine, you have no such emprical evidence whatsoever other than your feelings of free will.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by JimL View Post
      Your thoughts and reasoning play a role, but consciousness, according to Libets experiment, doesn't seem to play a role. You are not conscious of the decisions you make until miliseconds after the unconscious brain makes them.
      No Jim, our conscious thoughts and reasoning play NO role. How could they? These things are dictated to us by our brain chemicals before we are aware of them and are not in our control - if you are correct.




      Because chemicals are not just chemicals. Again the way that you seem to think about it is that your brain is just a blob of irrelevent matter that just sits there and does nothing. All that you know about the world and life is stored as information in those chemicals, and the brain as a whole functions as an information processer. So, if there is an immaterial conscious entity, an entity distinct from the physical body, an entity that thinks for itself, then how would you describe it and how does it function of itself as well as interact with and move the physical body and brain. Your answer seems to be, "I don't know, I have no idea, but for some reason I just believe it." Its just an intuitive feeling, but a lot of things feel right to us, but are completely wrong. It doesn't feel as though we are traveling thousands of miles an hour through space, but the empirical evidence shows our intuitive feelings about that to be wrong. If someone who didn't know any better asked for an explanation for that you could explain it via the emprical evidence, but for your free willed ghost in the machine, you have no such emprical evidence whatsoever other than your feelings of free will.
      James old buddy, do you realize how utterly stupid this sounds? You had no control over what you just spouted out, and you have no way of knowing if any of is correct or not. You are a slave to your chemical masters - and you will believe what they dictate that you believe - true or not.
      Last edited by seer; 10-04-2015, 08:12 AM.
      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

      Comment


      • Originally posted by seer View Post
        No Jim, our conscious thoughts and reasoning play NO role. How could they? These things are dictated to us by our brain chemicals before we are aware of them and are not in our control - if you are correct.
        Thats what I said. Consciousness is not a controlling factor in the decision making process, it is an awarness of the decisions unconsciously made. Consciousness plays a role in that it provides a conduit for information, but it isn't a thinking thing in its own right that makes free willed decisions. If you think it is, if you think that consciousness is a distinct and thinking entity in its own right, a ghost in the machine if you will, then you need to explain the process and how it does this in relation to the physical body.





        James old buddy, do you realize how utterly stupid this sounds? You had no control over what you just spouted out, and you have no way of knowing if any of is correct or not. You are a slave to your chemical masters - and you will believe what they dictate that you believe - true or not.
        What I realize is that you refuse or addmittedly just can not answer the question I put to you, and you ignore all the answers that you are given to your own questions and assertions. You just keep spouting out your disbelief without any justification whatsoever for your own belief of a free willed ghost in the machine. I feel as though I have free will, just as do you, but there is emperical evidence showing that I do not. Do you have any evidence to the contrary or not?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JimL View Post
          Thats what I said. Consciousness is not a controlling factor in the decision making process, it is an awarness of the decisions unconsciously made. Consciousness plays a role in that it provides a conduit for information, but it isn't a thinking thing in its own right that makes free willed decisions. If you think it is, if you think that consciousness is a distinct and thinking entity in its own right, a ghost in the machine if you will, then you need to explain the process and how it does this in relation to the physical body.

          What I realize is that you refuse or addmittedly just can not answer the question I put to you, and you ignore all the answers that you are given to your own questions and assertions. You just keep spouting out your disbelief without any justification whatsoever for your own belief of a free willed ghost in the machine. I feel as though I have free will, just as do you, but there is emperical evidence showing that I do not. Do you have any evidence to the contrary or not?
          No Jim, I'm presenting a clear contrast. I never claimed that I knew how the soul or immaterial mind influenced the process. What I am saying that if you are right you can never, ever know when you were determined to have true belief or not. That is why if our thoughts and deliberations don't play a causal role then we have lost all rationality. You are at the mercy of physical processes that completely dictate what you will think, believe - true or not. And completely out of your control. And thing is, most of us really do believe that our thoughtful deliberation do effect the process, and that they really are meaningful. You believe that every time you do a post - so your own behavior belies your theory.

          And Jim, there is work out there that demonstrates that thoughts can actually change the physical brain.

          http://www.firstthings.com/article/2...f-mental-force
          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

          Comment


          • Originally posted by seer View Post
            No Jim, I'm presenting a clear contrast. I never claimed that I knew how the soul or immaterial mind influenced the process. What I am saying that if you are right you can never, ever know when you were determined to have true belief or not. That is why if our thoughts and deliberations don't play a causal role then we have lost all rationality. You are at the mercy of physical processes that completely dictate what you will think, believe - true or not. And completely out of your control. And thing is, most of us really do believe that our thoughtful deliberation do effect the process, and that they really are meaningful. You believe that every time you do a post - so your own behavior belies your theory.
            Yes, but you don't only not claim to know, you can't even come up with a logical explanation for anything at all about your immarerial ghost. Does it have a thinking organ of its own? If so what need has it of a physical brain. Is it omniscient? Is it in and of itself conscious of the external world or is all that it knows supplied to it in the form of physical brain based chemical information. Based on what, and through what process, does it decipher that information so that its decisions differ from the physical brains processing of information. The assumption you are making is that the immaterial ghost has a brain of its own which in turn makes the idea of a need for the physical brain superfluous.
            As to your other point, its already been answered and ignored. You can know when your beliefs are true, even if they are determined, if they are consistent with observation. Thats why we know that a man can't walk on water.
            And Jim, there is work out there that demonstrates that thoughts can actually change the physical brain.

            http://www.firstthings.com/article/2...f-mental-force
            First you have to consider the source seer. Its a religious immaterialist agenda org. Second I read as much as needed to see that it doesn't support its claim. If you think there is something there that is relevant and supporting of your case then feel free to present it.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by JimL View Post
              Y
              As to your other point, its already been answered and ignored. You can know when your beliefs are true, even if they are determined, if they are consistent with observation. Thats why we know that a man can't walk on water.
              Nonsense Jim, since how your brain processes what you observe is also determined, along with any conclusions you come to because of said observations. You can not escape the Matrix you have created Jim, it colors and touches everything.

              First you have to consider the source seer. Its a religious immaterialist agenda org. Second I read as much as needed to see that it doesn't support its claim. If you think there is something there that is relevant and supporting of your case then feel free to present it.
              You are just bias Jim, Schwartz is a research professor in psychiatry at UCLA and has documented his results.
              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

              Comment


              • Originally posted by seer View Post
                Nonsense Jim, since how your brain processes what you observe is also determined, along with any conclusions you come to because of said observations. You can not escape the Matrix you have created Jim, it colors and touches everything.
                But that doesn't matter seer. Whether the world we live in is real or a simulated illusion of some sort then in either case that is the world of our observation, and what makes for rationality is the consistency of the observed facts of that world. To believe that a man walks on water in that world when the opposite is consistently observed to be the case would be irrational.


                You are just bias Jim, Schwartz is a research professor in psychiatry at UCLA and has documented his results.
                Well, if you see in there that something that supports your position, please present it.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                  But that doesn't matter seer. Whether the world we live in is real or a simulated illusion of some sort then in either case that is the world of our observation, and what makes for rationality is the consistency of the observed facts of that world. To believe that a man walks on water in that world when the opposite is consistently observed to be the case would be irrational.
                  Jim, I'm not saying that the world is an illusion, that is not what I meant by the Matrix. The point is that everything you think, believe, and even how you process observations is dictated by the chemicals in your brain. You have no control over any of it, and can never know in any particular instance if your chemicals have cause you to believe a true thing or not.

                  Well, if you see in there that something that supports your position, please present it.
                  It was touched on the that article. Or listen to this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcrGlUHlu4M
                  Last edited by seer; 10-04-2015, 06:50 PM.
                  Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by seer View Post
                    Jim, I'm not saying that the world is an illusion, that is not what I meant by the Matrix. The point is that everything you think, believe, and even how you process observations is dictated by the chemicals in your brain.
                    Which in turn is dictated by the percieved world in which the brain resides.

                    You have no control over any of it, and can never know in any particular instance if your chemicals have cause you to believe a true thing or not.
                    I don't think that the subject is sufficiently understood to affirm that we have no free will at all, its just that what does seem to be true is that we are indeed our brains and that most of our thoughts and actions are due to unconscious processes.


                    It was touched on the that article. Or listen to this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcrGlUHlu4M
                    He first goes on about how the brain is the cause of our feelings and thoughts etc etc. and then goes on to say that though the brain is the cause, we, i.e. our minds, as if our minds are separate from our brains, can change our brains and so change the way we feel and think etc etc. In my opinion he is making the assumption that because the brain can change that it is therefore a separate mind that is the cause of it's change. That doesn't make sense to me. If the brain recieves new information then it can process and use that information which can alter the way you think and feel, but that information isn't coming from a ghost in the machine, its coming from external sources, other brains. Nobody is arguing that the brain can't change with the aquisition of new knowledge, but he is arguing that the ghost in the machine, the true self, or mind, apparently with its own brain, is the cause of the change. Where does the true self, the distinct mind, attain this knowledge in order to effect cognitive changes in the brain?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by seer View Post
                      Tass you keep missing what epiphenomenalism actually is. Our conscious thoughts and reasoning play no causal role in the mental process. They don't do anything - they are merely by products of the physical processes.
                      Then what does play a causal role, seer? Your response, as always, assumes dualism where none exists and it assumes, without explanation, libertarian free-will. Everything, including logic and reasoning is done by the brain although the conscious brain is just the tip of the iceberg in the decision-making process.

                      No the question is why would the chemicals in my brain decide on Aug.19 1990 to cause me to go from being an agnostic to being a Christian. After all I had no choice in the matter if you guys are right.
                      Why you decided to become a Christian at a given point in time would have been the consequence of the totality of conscious and subconscious mental processing including your environment and overall social acculturation. If you had been born and raised in, say Pakistan the same sort of conscious and subconscious processing would have most probably resulted in you embracing Islam. Hence, instead of “I love Jesus” in great big red letters as your signature you would have had “I love Allah”.

                      Originally posted by seer View Post

                      And Jim, there is work out there that demonstrates that thoughts can actually change the physical brain.

                      http://www.firstthings.com/article/2...f-mental-force
                      Dembski!!!

                      "William Dembski is one of the main pushers of the pseudoscience of intelligent design"..."none of his qualifications in any way relate to natural sciences."

                      http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/William_Dembski

                      He's a total joke in academic circles seer, his only use is to provide dubious ammunition to Creationists.
                      “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                        Which in turn is dictated by the percieved world in which the brain resides.
                        But that would not change anything I said. Since all perceptions must be filtered through the brain.


                        I don't think that the subject is sufficiently understood to affirm that we have no free will at all, its just that what does seem to be true is that we are indeed our brains and that most of our thoughts and actions are due to unconscious processes.
                        Well good, that is what I have been saying all along.



                        He first goes on about how the brain is the cause of our feelings and thoughts etc etc. and then goes on to say that though the brain is the cause, we, i.e. our minds, as if our minds are separate from our brains, can change our brains and so change the way we feel and think etc etc. In my opinion he is making the assumption that because the brain can change that it is therefore a separate mind that is the cause of it's change. That doesn't make sense to me. If the brain recieves new information then it can process and use that information which can alter the way you think and feel, but that information isn't coming from a ghost in the machine, its coming from external sources, other brains. Nobody is arguing that the brain can't change with the aquisition of new knowledge, but he is arguing that the ghost in the machine, the true self, or mind, apparently with its own brain, is the cause of the change. Where does the true self, the distinct mind, attain this knowledge in order to effect cognitive changes in the brain?

                        Well first they have done work on the possible physical connection between the mind and the body http://www-physics.lbl.gov/~stapp/PTRS.pdf

                        Second, the important point that there is no rational reason to be wed to materialism.
                        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                          Then what does play a causal role, seer? Your response, as always, assumes dualism where none exists and it assumes, without explanation, libertarian free-will. Everything, including logic and reasoning is done by the brain although the conscious brain is just the tip of the iceberg in the decision-making process.

                          Why you decided to become a Christian at a given point in time would have been the consequence of the totality of conscious and subconscious mental processing including your environment and overall social acculturation. If you had been born and raised in, say Pakistan the same sort of conscious and subconscious processing would have most probably resulted in you embracing Islam. Hence, instead of “I love Jesus” in great big red letters as your signature you would have had “I love Allah”.
                          I get it, so my brain chemicals cause me to believe in false things, what false things do your brain chemicals cause you to believe are true Tass? BTW - the "Jesus I Love You" - is for you atheists. When you open my posts you can't help but say that in your mind. Hopefully, we can rewire your brain. You will thank me later...


                          Dembski!!!

                          "William Dembski is one of the main pushers of the pseudoscience of intelligent design"..."none of his qualifications in any way relate to natural sciences."

                          http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/William_Dembski

                          He's a total joke in academic circles seer, his only use is to provide dubious ammunition to Creationists.
                          Dembski only wrote the article about Schwartz, Home boy. And Dr. Jeffrey M. Schwartz is no joke and is published, and has done groundbreaking work on OCD, and here is one of his published papers from The Royal Society dealing with the very subject we are speaking of: http://www-physics.lbl.gov/~stapp/PTRS.pdf
                          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by seer View Post
                            Let's focus. First, no chemicals are not rational, in that they understand the laws of logic, deliberate and reason through problems based on logic. These things are the qualities of the conscious mind. But I'm not saying that chemicals can't cause us to have rational thoughts or actions. What I'm saying is that you can never know if you are having a rational thought. You can never know on any given subject that you were determined to think correctly. And that would include everything, like what you consider evidence, how you process evidence, and the conclusions you come to. My argument for thoughts playing a causal role in the process is the fact that rationality or knowing is impossible apart from conscious deliberations. If our thoughts are the meaningless by products of brain processes, then so is everything you just wrote and your scientific studies which are the results of "thoughts" where you can not know if you were determined to believe or think the right thing.
                            Sure let's focus. You made several claims that needs evidential support. I'm not saying chemicals themselves are rational. Strawman. The conscious mind can be, and indeed all the evidence already shows, the product of chemicals following the laws of physics. All the evidence we have is that a conscious mind relies on chemical processes in a complex brain. Saying we can never know on any given subject that you were determined to think correctly is not resolved by free will, since LFW is incoherent. You have yet to demonstrate that it isn't. You could say we may not be able to know anything with certainty since we could all be brains in a vat. So nothing about determinism causes any special problems here.

                            Now you need to back up the claim that thoughts play a causal role in brain processes because "rationality or knowing is impossible apart from conscious deliberations". That is an empirical claim that violates all the good data we have and you need empirical data to show it. You just wrote that you're "not saying that chemicals can't cause us to have rational thoughts or actions," after all. Also, you still need to show how being determined prevents a person from knowing they're right on a given subject. If I see 20 people jump off a cliff, flap their arms, and fall to their deaths, and I'm determined to believe from this that if I do the same I will fall to my death, why can't I know that?

                            Thoughts are not meaningless by products of brain processes. We need to have correct thoughts in order to survive.
                            Blog: Atheism and the City

                            If your whole worldview rests on a particular claim being true, you damn well better have evidence for it. You should have tons of evidence.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by The Thinker View Post
                              All the evidence we have is that a conscious mind relies on chemical processes in a complex brain. Saying we can never know on any given subject that you were determined to think correctly is not resolved by free will, since LFW is incoherent. You have yet to demonstrate that it isn't. You could say we may not be able to know anything with certainty since we could all be brains in a vat. So nothing about determinism causes any special problems here.
                              Nonsense Thinker, conscious deliberation, using the laws of logic and reason certainly do make all the difference. And we can generally know that our conclusions are sound as they conform to the rules of logic and reason. That is completely lost if your theory is correct. All your thoughts, beliefs and conclusions are dictated by forces that are non-rational by nature. So you agree that brain chemicals are not inherently rational, so where does rationality come in except the conscious mind?

                              Now you need to back up the claim that thoughts play a causal role in brain processes because "rationality or knowing is impossible apart from conscious deliberations". That is an empirical claim that violates all the good data we have and you need empirical data to show it. You just wrote that you're "not saying that chemicals can't cause us to have rational thoughts or actions," after all. Also, you still need to show how being determined prevents a person from knowing they're right on a given subject. If I see 20 people jump off a cliff, flap their arms, and fall to their deaths, and I'm determined to believe from this that if I do the same I will fall to my death, why can't I know that?

                              Thoughts are not meaningless by products of brain processes. We need to have correct thoughts in order to survive.
                              Thinker this is not making sense - if thoughts play no causal role then how are they meaningful? What do they actually do?
                              Last edited by seer; 10-05-2015, 10:19 AM.
                              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by seer View Post
                                Nonsense Thinker, conscious deliberation, using the laws of logic and reason certainly do make all the difference. And we can generally know that our conclusions are sound as they conform to the rules of logic and reason. That is completely lost if your theory is correct. All your thoughts, beliefs and conclusions are dictated by forces that are non-rational by nature. So you agree that brain chemicals are not inherently rational, so where does rationality come in except the conscious mind?
                                What's nonsense? That all the data shows consciousness is caused by and dependent on a physical brain? Is that nonsense? If it is, show me evidence that it is false. Conscious deliberation, using the laws of logic and reason certainly depend on having a functioning brain. It depends on physical matter causing it. So nothing is lost on my view. Your view is actually incoherent, and you still haven't refuted that.



                                Thinker this is not making sense - if thoughts play no causal role then how are they meaningful? What do they actually do?
                                Our thoughts are meaningful to us. They are what allow us to know what we're thinking about, which in turn is what our brain is doing. But we have zero conscious control over them. That is actually logically impossible and you have not even attempted to show me how it is logically possible. IF thoughts control our brain, show me some goddamn evidence of it!
                                Blog: Atheism and the City

                                If your whole worldview rests on a particular claim being true, you damn well better have evidence for it. You should have tons of evidence.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                185 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                428 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                305 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
                                406 responses
                                2,517 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Working...
                                X