THE GREAT PRAYER EXPERIMENT

[Johnny B]

Originally posted by Elysian:

Well first of all I could easily explain this in terms of cause and consequence. Without going into details... the cause would be the text I read “think about JB’s hair color”– visual input, triggering a thought process which resulted in a mental picture of JB’s hair – red curls that is

So my thought did not come from nowhere, your writing caused me to think about your hair... there was no free-will involved here, only physics and chemistry.

Lol....there you needed to go to details, atleast for the sake of clarity and openness,to be frank you even needed to define what a free will is in your context, but now that you intentionally/unintentionally skipped, let me make take a shot.

 

Free-will in scientific context is different from free-will in religious or theological context,in science the concept of free-will is at odds with the concept of Determinism(all current and future events are necessitated by past events combined with the laws of nature).

Free-will in Religious/theological context is at odds with Predestination(The preordainment of events by a Deity(mind you,not by the natural laws) who later punishes or rewards human beeings for their actions ).

The problem with your stance is, to defend your Religious stance you're taking a naturally deterministic stance, in an attempt to disarm the concept of Free-Will scientifically in order to boost or reconcile it with your otherwise irrational stance of accepting both

(A) there is an omniscient,omnipotent,infalliable and morally just Deity that not only knows the future, but predestines all futures.

(B)We (human beeings) have a free will of own in the strong sense, hence are accountable for our actions.

You'd be contributing more if you either supported your religious stance to the best of your knowledge or your naturally deterministic stance, as one can not harmoniously reconcile them.

 

Originally posted by Elysian:

Honestly, JB I’m not trying to be sarcastic. It’s just that I use logics as a tool to understand this reality, but not for explaining existential questions (so calling me irrational is in place), while you come across to me as someone who relies entirely on logics to understand everything, and if not possible fence-sitting is a good resort. So when you say a big no to the statement that our thoughts are only the product of chemical reactions, I simply don’t see the argument for your conclusion... that our thoughts would arise from nothing, as an isolated event, that initially triggers the rest of the thought cascade. I’m wondering then where and of what the “original” thought was made, if chemistry is not involved?

This reminds me of my chemistry class back in College where a freind asked the Professor if there was difference between asking a permision to process the chemical substance C9H9N and a permision to vissit the toilet?.

 

Cause & Effect describe a relationship between chain of events,while a thought is the product of a thinking process,what causes us to THINK in the first place is totally different subject.

To claim that we're conscious beeings should suffice for now.

 

Originally posted by Elysian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by JB

If you meant to say that our thoughts and actions are all derived merely from the chemical reactions in our brains, hence, they,per se lack genuine meaning , so is your thought that there is a God that answeres your prayers, or even more concretely , so is your very thought that this is the case.

I most certainly don’t believe it, but if I would use logic thinking isn’t this the rational conclusion?

Um...i think by answering why don't you believe it would be of great help !!

 

Originally posted by Elysian:

I must say I’m a bit shocked to hear this from you. I thought you were a true evolutionist... you know the kind that argues we originate from a cocktail of amino acids without even blinking.

You’re starting to sound religious JB. You know there’s this swedish saying “när fan blir gammal blir han religiös”... are you getting old sxb

The universal knowledge that human beeings don't get younger compels you to conclude so , but i've secretly removed my aging gens with age-resistant ones.

En farbror ( Olle Larsson) sa en gång "Vem fan vill förbli ung och dum !?"

[Elysian]

Originally posted by JB

 

Lol....there you needed to go to details, at least for the sake of clarity and openness,to be frank you even needed to define what a free will is in your context, but now that you intentionally/unintentionally skipped, let me make take a shot.

 

Free-will in scientific context is different from free-will in religious or theological context,in science the concept of free-will is at odds with the concept of Determinism(all current and future events are necessitated by past events combined with the laws of nature).

Lets skip the theological context, I’m only interested in the scientific one.

 

Lol JB, I don’t have any agenda to this discussion, whatever the outcome of this discussion may be I’m satisfied, I don’t have any ready-made answers to you, I’m open-minded as long as you have convincing rationality or facts to support your arguments and so far I’m not convinced. If you could help me come to the logical conclusion that we in the end do have a free-will... whatever the definition might be – I’d be glad. If not, nothing has changed.

 

 

Well JB, I’m arguing, that if I use rational thinking, there is no free-will/choice whatsoever, so I don't think I have to define?

 

You wanted details about how I came to the conclusion about you having red hair... I really wanted to skip this part to keep this discussion on more abstract level (at least avoid to make it boring), but okay.

 

 

 

I can see the words on the screen thanks to the light being reflected and when this light reaches my eye, the photoreceptors of the retina (rods and cones) transform the energy in the light into chemical energy which on the biological level will result in the firing of action potential in a certain pattern. This activates a certain network of neurons that will travel horizontally to the occipital lobe (our visual center that is) which is in the back of the brain. Here the information will be processed and trigger many other neural networks, and at least one signal is sent to somewhere in the frontal lobe.

 

The signal to the frontal lobe triggers in turn many other areas in the brain to get information (mainly from our memory) on how to respond to this input . Finally signals are sent to the periferal nervous system, in more precis to the nerves controlling my finger muscles. So I type “red curls” because that’s the thought the words on the screen generated in my brain.

 

 

Now I explained my point of view how a thinking process occurs. Now I’m interested in you explaining how a thought without any chemical or physical properties initiates a chemical response, which you at least agree on is needed for the thought process. I think you need to explain it because of your previous statement

 

 

 

Originally posted by JB

 

Wait a jiffy abayo , the answer to that 'probably to be' sarcastic question is a BIG No, what we think is not the product of mere chemical reactions in our brains,it is the product of our thoughts.

chemical reactions are what take place during our thought processing,we decide what we want to think about,we don't decide what chemical reactions that will take place in our brains,

How on earth do we decide what to think???

 

 

 

Again you said

 

Cause & Effect describe a relationship between chain of events,while a thought is the product of a thinking process,what causes us to THINK in the first place is totally different subject.

To claim that we're conscious beeings should suffice for now.

Well, I think I did a pretty good explanation for how a thought process could be generated... but perhaps there are different definitions to what it means to “THINK”, and you say it is a totally different subject, what subject does it belong to??

 

JB, du är kanske förvisso gammal men kanske är jag äldre och därmed mindre dum Jag är som katten runt het gröt, pratar om allt annat än vad du hade tänkt dig... men det gör väl inget

[Johnny B]

Elysian

Am i losing you or is your point of contention getting blured and blured?.

 

Earlier when you said

Perhaps the Omniscient, Omnipotent and morally just God had preordained this discussion of yours, and hence preordained us praying to him, and hence you JB questioning the meaning of the prayer etc. etc.

And concluded, firmly stating:

"If there is no higher deity, then our actions and thoughts would solely be the consequence of the chemical reactions occurring in our brain."

 

I thought it was obvious that you had clearly taken a theological stance regarding the existence of a Deity and were inline with that Deity's predestination of future events, nevertheless, now you're intrested in free-will in a the scientific context.

 

Since you want us to intentionally digress, hopefully for a good reason,i don't see why i should hold you back,

 

Here we go , Determinism VS free-will in science.

 

First of all unlike you i beleive in science defining the subject of matter is vital to any future result regarding that particular subject matter,and since you nowhere defined what you mean by free-will, let me again define what it scientifically implies, namely, the actions of the body, including the brain and the mind, are not wholly determined by physical causality,while the defination of determinism is more complex, let me define the nomological determinism which i assume is what you had in mind, it implies that all current and future events are necessitated by past events combined with the laws of nature, hence the delima. fair enough?, Go

 

hold it right there , You further stated that "I most certainly don’t believe it, but if I would use logic thinking isn’t this the rational conclusion?" , what are we trying to acomplish here when you most certainly don't beleive in our actions beeing the mere product of chemical reactions.?

 

Elysian, Du är kanske äldre men inte det minsta dum, Katter är så smarta at de serveras när de jamar istället för att jaga.

Att prata om närliggande ämne gör ju inget,men, jag var chockad att du nästan insisterade på att byta Ämne,suck och bederövelse tänkte jag, vad sträffas jag för tro?!

[Elysian]

Okay, enough about you said this and you said that. It seems like we’re arguing for the sake of the argument. I’ve been sidestepping the topic of your post becajse I didn’t want to discuss that subject, but some aspect of the topic did interest me, more precisely the concept of free-will.

 

I most certainly can’t harmonize free-will and the concept of an almighty God that has pre-ordained things, in my reasoning this remains a paradox. The statement I wrote previously and which you, JB, still asking me to consolidate is not something I believe, and I thought I made that clear in the sentence that did follow.

 

Anyway, like you I believe there is a free-will, emphasizing on “I believe”, because I can’t logically explain it. I’m not really sure how I would have religious agenda with this discussion, in that case I’d be arguing opposite case. However, I don’t have any rational arguments to support free-will, so if you do have, please share them.

 

If there is a scientific definition to free-will, I’d love to learn on which principles they were founded!!

 

One might wonder why I’m arguing something which in the end I don’t believe in... well let’s just say I find it stimulating and mind-boggling... and I hope along the way I’ve learnt something from this discussion.

 

Now having said that, what I wanted to argue was that for a free-will to exist there has to be a “free” THINKING, and in my last post I wanted to explain how our thinking is derived from nothing more than physical and chemical responses. Hence, “free” would have no actual meaning.

 

If you don’t agree with this, and instead argue the opposite, with all due respect that this is a bit far-fetched from the topic at hand, what facts and/or reasoning do you base your conclusion on besides referring to that there is a scientific definition for free-will.

[Legend of Zu]

OOOH I forgot about this topic...

 

JB..am more than willing to discuss this issue with you as long as we cover the basics first..and the basics I mean...

 

1 - Understand the relationship between Time and Predestination

2 - Understand the Omniscience of God

 

Everything else is then discussed along the above context...

 

See our earlier discussion was like arguing with someone [who believes Earth is flat] about whether Earth rotates from clockwise. <-- this is just extrme example but i hope you understand...and it is not your faith that I am referring to....more like discussing Free will & predestination without understanding the Time Effect!

 

Cheers