Humans do not have free will

why make a point about a bearded man in the sky when the only religion that believes in that are the Mormons? although i would be shocked if they allowed their God to have facial hair come to think of it.

Because it's the stereotypical straw-man argument against God's existence.

If one's definition of God is so childish as that, then it is easy to understand why they are not a believer.

If a man's definition of "free will" is that they should be in completely control of everything that they do, capable of shaping reality as they wish, then it is also easy to believe why such a man wouldn't believe in "free will". Because a "free will" of that sort clearly doesn't exist for human beings. A "free will", when defined in other ways, on the other hand, might very well exist.
 
Thanks for the revelation, I no longer need to take responsibility.

watch out world.
 
Because it's the stereotypical straw-man argument against God's existence.

If one's definition of God is so childish as that, then it is easy to understand why they are not a believer.

If a man's definition of "free will" is that they should be in completely control of everything that they do, capable of shaping reality as they wish, then it is also easy to believe why such a man wouldn't believe in "free will". Because a "free will" of that sort clearly doesn't exist for human beings. A "free will", when defined in other ways, on the other hand, might very well exist.


took me a minute but i got it.
 
I thought ts was aiming more to the idea of "you" being the ego or conciousness etc. As in "you" ( the ego etc.) being an illusion. If you say "I think therefore I am" what is the "I" that is doing the thinking?

What exactly it is is irrelevant.

It’s true essence could be debatable, but “I think therefore I am” means there’s something there and it’s undeniable.
 
tenor.gif
 
Please provide the scientific explanation for consciousness . . .

PS I can save you googling.....it does not exist

Here is a video... yeah, I am sorry but it is a video with links to papers/studies. Go learn


Here are all the links in the video

Sources for Neuroscientific Evidence: Irreducible Mind (part 1):


July 2005, Science Magazine Article:

https://www.sciencemag.org/site/feature/misc/webfeat/125th/


John Eccles - How The Self Controls It’s Brain


Colin McGinn - The Mysterious Flame


Jaegwon Kim - Philosophy of Mind


Wilder Penfield - Mystery of the Mind


Richard Leblanc - The White Paper: Wilder Penfield, the Stream of Consciousness, and the Physiology of Mind


Can functional brain imaging discover consciousness in the brain?

https://www.ingentaconnect.com/cont...KkLZOy-EZVQFta-AxsGioKwh49rxylBW-0yhkTWsgslW8


Jerome Feldman - The neural binding problem(s)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3538094/


Michael Shermer - “What Is Pseudoscience?” Scientific American, 1 Sept. 2011,

www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-pseudoscience/.


Neural Decoding of Visual Imagery During Sleep:

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/340/6132/639


Dreamed Movement Elicits Activation in the Sensorimotor Cortex:

https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(11)01031-1


The fusiform face area: a cortical region specialized for the perception of faces:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1857737/


Constraint-induced movement therapy to enhance recovery after stroke:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4361809/


Jeffery Schwartz & Sharon Begley - The Mind and The Brain


Systematic Changes in Cerebral Glucose Metabolic Rate After Successful Behavior Modification Treatment of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8629886/


Neuroanatomical Aspects of Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy Response in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. An Evolving Perspective on Brain and Behaviour:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9829025/


Rethinking Feelings: An FMRI Study of the Cognitive Regulation of Emotion:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12495527/


Training-induced cognitive and neural plasticity:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3579194/


Neural Correlates of Conscious Self-Regulation of Emotion:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11549754/


"Change the Mind and You Change the Brain": Effects of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy on the Neural Correlates of Spider Phobia:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12595193/


Rodolfo Llinas & Patrica Churchland - The Mind-Brain Continuum


Plasticity in the Frequency Representation of Primary Auditory Cortex Following Discrimination Training in Adult Owl Monkeys:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8423485/


Sight and blindness in the same person:

https://www.researchgate.net/public...n_the_same_person_Gating_in_the_visual_system


Dissociative Part-Dependent Resting-State Activity in Dissociative Identity Disorder:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24922512/


J. M. Quen - Split Minds/Split Brains: Historical and Current Persepectives


Psychophysiologic Aspects of Multiple Personality Disorder: A review:

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/47ec/decc2ac8073516914dd1eeb2dbf4e7ad9ac3.pdf


Psychophysiologic Phenomena in Multiple Personality and Hypnosis:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6678535/


Optical differences in cases of multiple personality disorder. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2760599/


Optical differences in multiple personality disorder: A second look:

https://journals.lww.com/jonmd/Abst...al_Differences_in_Multiple_Personality.3.aspx


Differential Autonomic Nervous System Activity in Multiple Personality Disorder:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2333357


Psychophysiologic Phenomena in Multiple Personality and Hypnosis:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6678535/


Good post. I’ll check these out at a later that.

The world is not just mechanical Newtonian physics. There is so much phenomena out there that we can’t explain with science. Human consciousness is certainly one of them.
 
I agree with the statement. Specially after reading Yuval Harari.

I just refuse to believe it. I guess the illusion of free will is too strong.

You seen that Devs show by the Ex Machina guy? It's all about that.
 
I mean you can get really upset at interpellation Althusser-style and argue that everyone is in bowling lanes with the bumpers up by virtue of wearing clothes, collecting money, stopping at stop lights etc

If you wanted to get at the deeper debate you'd probably have more luck arguing nature/nurture and to what extent it defines free will
 
The evolution of the Schrodinger Equation is completely deterministic. You are a wavefuction, you evolve according to the Schrodinger equation.

Your consciousness does not exist, what you are describing is "awareness". There is no awareness/experience/consciousness when the body is put under anesthesia, or is knocked out/chocked out, or is asleep without dreaming, or before you were born or after you die.

Inspiring Philosophy is a well known charlatan who pushes pseudo-QM.

But what of shrodingers cat. Before I opened this thread this topic was both absolute shit and a real gem but then I clicked on it and here we are.
 
I think you're the one that's scared homie. Accepting that there may be a supernatural component to our consciousness would require you to face the truth that you might end up being accountable for your life by 'God'. It's much easier to just put up some juvenile shitposting to claim nothing you do matters because everything will be eventually annihilated. What good does this belief do for you anyway? You're condemning yourself to a pointless life. The kind of life that leads to bitterness, resentment, and cruelty.
What supernatural component is there to human consciousness?
 
Determinism forced him to make this thread.
 
What until you learn that atoms are just an illusion. There are no particles.
 
Everything in this material universe that we are trapped in is just particles bouncing around against each other.

Even mater and and particles are insubstantial. The protons and neutrons themselves are made up of quarks that don't account for the mass of those particles and we don't extactly "know" what the rest of the mass is, we're still working that out, but the prevailing theory is its "strong force" carried by mesons and gluons which (if I understand correctly) blink in and out of existance. So the mass of most mater is an immaterial force supported by "force carriers" that frequently don't exist.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16095-its-confirmed-matter-is-merely-vacuum-fluctuations/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_interaction
 
What exactly it is is irrelevant.

It’s true essence could be debatable, but “I think therefore I am” means there’s something there and it’s undeniable.
There's something there just not what most people think is. Most the time people want a permanent thing to attach to like a soul etc.
 
Even mater and and particles are insubstantial. The protons and neutrons themselves are made up of quarks that don't account for the mass of those particles and we don't extactly "know" what the rest of the mass is, we're still working that out, but the prevailing theory is its "strong force" carried by mesons and gluons which (if I understand correctly) blink in and out of existance. So the mass of most mater is an immaterial force supported by "force carriers" that frequently don't exist.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16095-its-confirmed-matter-is-merely-vacuum-fluctuations/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_interaction

Its not that gluons are what constitutes the "rest of the mass". Its just that mass isn't really what you were taught in school. It isn't ever really "stuff". Mass is the same thing as inertia. Its a measure of how hard it is move an object. Particles interact with fields, and those fields can be "sticky" in that they retard the movement of a particle. The stronger the interactions, the "stickier" the field is, and the more the particle resists changes to its movement.
 
Its not that gluons are what constitutes the "rest of the mass". Its just that mass isn't really what you were taught in school. It isn't ever really "stuff". Mass is the same thing as inertia. Its a measure of how hard it is move an object. Particles interact with fields, and those fields can be "sticky" in that they retard the movement of a particle. The stronger the interactions, the "stickier" the field is, and the more the particle resists changes to its movement.

Well that's the thing. The mass is just force. It's like electromagnatism but stronger. But, mass largely doesn't contain any material. That the gluons and mesons don't always exist just adds to "whoah" factor. Matter being almost completely immaterial and comprised of a force carried by things that usually dont exist is my personal vote for biggest WTF in all of our current conception of the universe. It's just sooo disconnected from our daily observable experience of the universe.
 
Well that's the thing. The mass is just force. It's like electromagnatism but stronger. But, mass largely doesn't contain any material. That the gluons and mesons don't always exist just adds to "whoah" factor. Matter being almost completely immaterial and comprised of a force carried by things that usually dont exist is my personal vote for biggest WTF in all of our current conception of the universe. It's just sooo disconnected from our daily observable experience of the universe.

It is a huge wtf. But its even further than that. It is just that its "mostly immaterial". Its all immaterial. In QFT, particle are just illusions caused by fluctuations in fields. There are no electrons, there is only an electron field, and certain excitations of the field give rise to something that we have always misinterpreted as a particle.
 
Back
Top