Total Posts:801|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Do we possess free will?

SecularMerlin
Posts: 5,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?
The only true wisdom lies in knowing that you know nothing.
-Socrates

Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality
-Lewis Carrol
Furyan5
Posts: 1,516
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2017 10:37:04 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

Neuropsychological evidence suggests not.
SecularMerlin
Posts: 5,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2017 10:40:09 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/17/2017 10:37:04 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

Neuropsychological evidence suggests not.

An interesting point. Might we discuss exactly what neuropsychology says on the subject in case anyone is curious? Or could we provide a link?
The only true wisdom lies in knowing that you know nothing.
-Socrates

Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality
-Lewis Carrol
Furyan5
Posts: 1,516
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2017 10:58:46 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/17/2017 10:40:09 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
At 12/17/2017 10:37:04 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

Neuropsychological evidence suggests not.

An interesting point. Might we discuss exactly what neuropsychology says on the subject in case anyone is curious? Or could we provide a link?

https://www.bethinking.org...

Let's get this ball rolling as fate dictates. :-)
Vanamali
Posts: 93
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2017 11:10:05 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

My vote is that we have free-will - that means we take responsibility for our actions. I think this whole idea that we are but machines is silly - yes the type of woman i am attracted to might be beyond my understanding, but that's just the initial attraction, what catches my eye, but the type of person that most people end up with will be the person that they decide of their own free-will

There was this case of the Texas shooter back in the 60's who took position in a tower and started killing people? Just an ordinary guy up to that point suddenly lost it basically and they later found a tumor in his brain, but such kinds of incidents are not proof that we lack free-will. If we are of sound mind, then we do have free-will
SecularMerlin
Posts: 5,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 4:50:57 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/17/2017 11:10:05 PM, Vanamali wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

My vote is that we have free-will - that means we take responsibility for our actions. I think this whole idea that we are but machines is silly - yes the type of woman i am attracted to might be beyond my understanding, but that's just the initial attraction, what catches my eye, but the type of person that most people end up with will be the person that they decide of their own free-will

There was this case of the Texas shooter back in the 60's who took position in a tower and started killing people? Just an ordinary guy up to that point suddenly lost it basically and they later found a tumor in his brain, but such kinds of incidents are not proof that we lack free-will. If we are of sound mind, then we do have free-will

And yet the more we study the brain the more we find that we are genetically and chemically driven. Can we discount these findings because we don't like the implications?
The only true wisdom lies in knowing that you know nothing.
-Socrates

Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality
-Lewis Carrol
Furyan5
Posts: 1,516
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 8:02:26 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/17/2017 11:10:05 PM, Vanamali wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

My vote is that we have free-will - that means we take responsibility for our actions. I think this whole idea that we are but machines is silly - yes the type of woman i am attracted to might be beyond my understanding, but that's just the initial attraction, what catches my eye, but the type of person that most people end up with will be the person that they decide of their own free-will

There was this case of the Texas shooter back in the 60's who took position in a tower and started killing people? Just an ordinary guy up to that point suddenly lost it basically and they later found a tumor in his brain, but such kinds of incidents are not proof that we lack free-will. If we are of sound mind, then we do have free-will

Get your hands on Wegners "The illusion of conscious will". It may change your vote.
Here's a brief overview.http://bigthink.com...
3RU7AL
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 2:34:55 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

The Standard Argument Against Free-Will (TSAAFW)

1) Determinism is incompatible with free-will (an inevitable outcome is not a willful choice).
2) Indeterminism is incompatible with free-will (a random or probabilistic outcome is not a willful choice).
3) No clever mix of the two solve either incompatibility.

Therefore, free-will is an incoherent concept.
Furyan5
Posts: 1,516
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 2:54:13 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 2:34:55 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

The Standard Argument Against Free-Will (TSAAFW)

1) Determinism is incompatible with free-will (an inevitable outcome is not a willful choice).
2) Indeterminism is incompatible with free-will (a random or probabilistic outcome is not a willful choice).
3) No clever mix of the two solve either incompatibility.

Therefore, free-will is an incoherent concept.

What law states that a concept must be coherent to exist?
3RU7AL
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 4:09:30 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 2:54:13 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:34:55 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

The Standard Argument Against Free-Will (TSAAFW)

1) Determinism is incompatible with free-will (an inevitable outcome is not a willful choice).
2) Indeterminism is incompatible with free-will (a random or probabilistic outcome is not a willful choice).
3) No clever mix of the two solve either incompatibility.

Therefore, free-will is an incoherent concept.

What law states that a concept must be coherent to exist?

If you disregard logical coherence, please explain your preferred standard.
SecularMerlin
Posts: 5,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 4:13:22 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 4:09:30 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:54:13 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:34:55 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

The Standard Argument Against Free-Will (TSAAFW)

1) Determinism is incompatible with free-will (an inevitable outcome is not a willful choice).
2) Indeterminism is incompatible with free-will (a random or probabilistic outcome is not a willful choice).
3) No clever mix of the two solve either incompatibility.

Therefore, free-will is an incoherent concept.

What law states that a concept must be coherent to exist?

If you disregard logical coherence, please explain your preferred standard.

Quantum mechanics suggests a more fluid reality. Cause may sometimes precede effect and the mere act of observing changes the nature of reality.
The only true wisdom lies in knowing that you know nothing.
-Socrates

Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality
-Lewis Carrol
3RU7AL
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 6:24:32 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 4:13:22 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
At 12/18/2017 4:09:30 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:54:13 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:34:55 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

The Standard Argument Against Free-Will (TSAAFW)

1) Determinism is incompatible with free-will (an inevitable outcome is not a willful choice).
2) Indeterminism is incompatible with free-will (a random or probabilistic outcome is not a willful choice).
3) No clever mix of the two solve either incompatibility.

Therefore, free-will is an incoherent concept.

What law states that a concept must be coherent to exist?

If you disregard logical coherence, please explain your preferred standard.

Quantum mechanics suggests a more fluid reality. Cause may sometimes precede effect and the mere act of observing changes the nature of reality.

If specific events are causal, (either forward or reverse or non-sequential) then they are not free choices.
If specific events are non-causal, (random or probabilistic) they are not free choices.

Nothing about quantum mechanics (or logic) suggests a third option.
SecularMerlin
Posts: 5,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 6:27:43 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 6:24:32 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 4:13:22 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
At 12/18/2017 4:09:30 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:54:13 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:34:55 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

The Standard Argument Against Free-Will (TSAAFW)

1) Determinism is incompatible with free-will (an inevitable outcome is not a willful choice).
2) Indeterminism is incompatible with free-will (a random or probabilistic outcome is not a willful choice).
3) No clever mix of the two solve either incompatibility.

Therefore, free-will is an incoherent concept.

What law states that a concept must be coherent to exist?

If you disregard logical coherence, please explain your preferred standard.

Quantum mechanics suggests a more fluid reality. Cause may sometimes precede effect and the mere act of observing changes the nature of reality.

If specific events are causal, (either forward or reverse or non-sequential) then they are not free choices.
If specific events are non-causal, (random or probabilistic) they are not free choices.

Nothing about quantum mechanics (or logic) suggests a third option.

With that in mind do you prefer one theory to the other?
The only true wisdom lies in knowing that you know nothing.
-Socrates

Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality
-Lewis Carrol
3RU7AL
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 7:12:33 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 6:27:43 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
At 12/18/2017 6:24:32 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 4:13:22 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
At 12/18/2017 4:09:30 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:54:13 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:34:55 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

The Standard Argument Against Free-Will (TSAAFW)

1) Determinism is incompatible with free-will (an inevitable outcome is not a willful choice).
2) Indeterminism is incompatible with free-will (a random or probabilistic outcome is not a willful choice).
3) No clever mix of the two solve either incompatibility.

Therefore, free-will is an incoherent concept.

What law states that a concept must be coherent to exist?

If you disregard logical coherence, please explain your preferred standard.

Quantum mechanics suggests a more fluid reality. Cause may sometimes precede effect and the mere act of observing changes the nature of reality.

If specific events are causal, (either forward or reverse or non-sequential) then they are not free choices.
If specific events are non-causal, (random or probabilistic) they are not free choices.

Nothing about quantum mechanics (or logic) suggests a third option.

With that in mind do you prefer one theory to the other?

Causality seems to be integral to our ability to make predictions.
Furyan5
Posts: 1,516
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 7:31:00 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 4:09:30 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:54:13 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:34:55 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

The Standard Argument Against Free-Will (TSAAFW)

1) Determinism is incompatible with free-will (an inevitable outcome is not a willful choice).
2) Indeterminism is incompatible with free-will (a random or probabilistic outcome is not a willful choice).
3) No clever mix of the two solve either incompatibility.

Therefore, free-will is an incoherent concept.

What law states that a concept must be coherent to exist?

If you disregard logical coherence, please explain your preferred standard.

Does Asgard exist? As Thor puts it, Asgard is wherever Asgardians call home.
Asgard is the home of an imaginary race. It exists, not as a place, but as a concept. Free will is a concept. An impossible concept, but a concept, none the less. This is what allows discussion. In the same vein, God exists. But so do unicorns and dragons.
Quadrunner
Posts: 5,148
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 8:31:34 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

Not if you are a materialist I suppose.
3RU7AL
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 8:45:26 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 7:31:00 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 4:09:30 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:54:13 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 2:34:55 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:

If you disregard logical coherence, please explain your preferred standard.

Does Asgard exist? As Thor puts it, Asgard is wherever Asgardians call home.
Asgard is the home of an imaginary race. It exists, not as a place, but as a concept. Free will is a concept. An impossible concept, but a concept, none the less. This is what allows discussion. In the same vein, God exists. But so do unicorns and dragons.

You are correct. Imaginary concepts may be logically incoherent.
3RU7AL
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 8:46:59 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 8:31:34 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

Not if you are a materialist I suppose.

Substance dualism does nothing to resolve the fundamental incoherence of free-will.
keithprosser
Posts: 6,092
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 8:47:48 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 7:31:00 PM, Furyan5 wrote:

Does Asgard exist? As Thor puts it, Asgard is wherever Asgardians call home.
Asgard is the home of an imaginary race. It exists, not as a place, but as a concept. Free will is a concept. An impossible concept, but a concept, none the less. This is what allows discussion. In the same vein, God exists. But so do unicorns and dragons.

I think we have been here before with 'reality'! I think its much better to say unequivoally that "the concept of god exists" and "god does not exist". God does not exist in any sensible vein, sense or meaning of 'exist'!
Quadrunner
Posts: 5,148
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 9:01:52 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 8:46:59 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 8:31:34 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

Not if you are a materialist I suppose.

Substance dualism does nothing to resolve the fundamental incoherence of free-will.

You are a rather presumptuous individual.
3RU7AL
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 9:21:38 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 9:01:52 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
At 12/18/2017 8:46:59 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 8:31:34 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

Not if you are a materialist I suppose.

Substance dualism does nothing to resolve the fundamental incoherence of free-will.

You are a rather presumptuous individual.

Your super magical ghost spirit is either part of a causal chain, or acting randomly.

In both cases, free will remains logically incoherent.
SecularMerlin
Posts: 5,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 9:36:48 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 8:31:34 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
At 12/17/2017 8:36:39 PM, SecularMerlin wrote:
Is free will within the scope of human agency?

Why or why not?

Not if you are a materialist I suppose.

I'm not sure if I am strictly speaking a materialist. Too many questions about the nature of matter
The only true wisdom lies in knowing that you know nothing.
-Socrates

Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality
-Lewis Carrol
Furyan5
Posts: 1,516
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 9:58:10 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 8:47:48 PM, keithprosser wrote:
At 12/18/2017 7:31:00 PM, Furyan5 wrote:

Does Asgard exist? As Thor puts it, Asgard is wherever Asgardians call home.
Asgard is the home of an imaginary race. It exists, not as a place, but as a concept. Free will is a concept. An impossible concept, but a concept, none the less. This is what allows discussion. In the same vein, God exists. But so do unicorns and dragons.

I think we have been here before with 'reality'! I think its much better to say unequivoally that "the concept of god exists" and "god does not exist". God does not exist in any sensible vein, sense or meaning of 'exist'!

I agree, but still maintain this is an opinion. No empirical evidence exists to support or dismiss the existence of a creator, of sorts. The one thing I know is that there is much we do not know.
3RU7AL
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 10:57:46 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 9:58:10 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 8:47:48 PM, keithprosser wrote:
At 12/18/2017 7:31:00 PM, Furyan5 wrote:

Does Asgard exist? As Thor puts it, Asgard is wherever Asgardians call home.
Asgard is the home of an imaginary race. It exists, not as a place, but as a concept. Free will is a concept. An impossible concept, but a concept, none the less. This is what allows discussion. In the same vein, God exists. But so do unicorns and dragons.

I think we have been here before with 'reality'! I think its much better to say unequivoally that "the concept of god exists" and "god does not exist". God does not exist in any sensible vein, sense or meaning of 'exist'!

I agree, but still maintain this is an opinion. No empirical evidence exists to support or dismiss the existence of a creator, of sorts. The one thing I know is that there is much we do not know.

You don't seem to understand the problem with the logical fallacy commonly known as "appeal to ignorance".

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...
SecularMerlin
Posts: 5,007
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 11:12:02 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 10:57:46 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 9:58:10 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 8:47:48 PM, keithprosser wrote:
At 12/18/2017 7:31:00 PM, Furyan5 wrote:

Does Asgard exist? As Thor puts it, Asgard is wherever Asgardians call home.
Asgard is the home of an imaginary race. It exists, not as a place, but as a concept. Free will is a concept. An impossible concept, but a concept, none the less. This is what allows discussion. In the same vein, God exists. But so do unicorns and dragons.

I think we have been here before with 'reality'! I think its much better to say unequivoally that "the concept of god exists" and "god does not exist". God does not exist in any sensible vein, sense or meaning of 'exist'!

I agree, but still maintain this is an opinion. No empirical evidence exists to support or dismiss the existence of a creator, of sorts. The one thing I know is that there is much we do not know.

You don't seem to understand the problem with the logical fallacy commonly known as "appeal to ignorance".

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...

Actually the appeal to ignorance cuts both ways. He would seem to be trying to avoid such an argument.
The only true wisdom lies in knowing that you know nothing.
-Socrates

Imagination is the only weapon in the war against reality
-Lewis Carrol
Furyan5
Posts: 1,516
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2017 11:39:11 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 10:57:46 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 9:58:10 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 8:47:48 PM, keithprosser wrote:
At 12/18/2017 7:31:00 PM, Furyan5 wrote:

Does Asgard exist? As Thor puts it, Asgard is wherever Asgardians call home.
Asgard is the home of an imaginary race. It exists, not as a place, but as a concept. Free will is a concept. An impossible concept, but a concept, none the less. This is what allows discussion. In the same vein, God exists. But so do unicorns and dragons.

I think we have been here before with 'reality'! I think its much better to say unequivoally that "the concept of god exists" and "god does not exist". God does not exist in any sensible vein, sense or meaning of 'exist'!

I agree, but still maintain this is an opinion. No empirical evidence exists to support or dismiss the existence of a creator, of sorts. The one thing I know is that there is much we do not know.

You don't seem to understand the problem with the logical fallacy commonly known as "appeal to ignorance".

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...

I'm not saying X is true, because you can't prove it's not.
I'm saying you can't know for sure that X is false, without proof.
Until the box is open, I can only have an opinion on whether the cat's alive or dead. I can't state my opinion as fact. Even if the odds are 1 in 10^9999999999999... that it's alive, it's still an opinion.
3RU7AL
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2017 2:35:40 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/18/2017 11:39:11 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 10:57:46 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 9:58:10 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 8:47:48 PM, keithprosser wrote:
At 12/18/2017 7:31:00 PM, Furyan5 wrote:

Does Asgard exist? As Thor puts it, Asgard is wherever Asgardians call home.
Asgard is the home of an imaginary race. It exists, not as a place, but as a concept. Free will is a concept. An impossible concept, but a concept, none the less. This is what allows discussion. In the same vein, God exists. But so do unicorns and dragons.

I think we have been here before with 'reality'! I think its much better to say unequivoally that "the concept of god exists" and "god does not exist". God does not exist in any sensible vein, sense or meaning of 'exist'!

I agree, but still maintain this is an opinion. No empirical evidence exists to support or dismiss the existence of a creator, of sorts. The one thing I know is that there is much we do not know.

You don't seem to understand the problem with the logical fallacy commonly known as "appeal to ignorance".

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...

I'm not saying X is true, because you can't prove it's not.
I'm saying you can't know for sure that X is false, without proof.
Until the box is open, I can only have an opinion on whether the cat's alive or dead. I can't state my opinion as fact. Even if the odds are 1 in 10^9999999999999... that it's alive, it's still an opinion.

Unless you explicitly define "a creator, of sorts" you are using the ambiguity fallacy, which is an appeal to ignorance.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...
Furyan5
Posts: 1,516
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2017 8:19:25 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/19/2017 2:35:40 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 11:39:11 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 10:57:46 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 9:58:10 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 8:47:48 PM, keithprosser wrote:
At 12/18/2017 7:31:00 PM, Furyan5 wrote:

Does Asgard exist? As Thor puts it, Asgard is wherever Asgardians call home.
Asgard is the home of an imaginary race. It exists, not as a place, but as a concept. Free will is a concept. An impossible concept, but a concept, none the less. This is what allows discussion. In the same vein, God exists. But so do unicorns and dragons.

I think we have been here before with 'reality'! I think its much better to say unequivoally that "the concept of god exists" and "god does not exist". God does not exist in any sensible vein, sense or meaning of 'exist'!

I agree, but still maintain this is an opinion. No empirical evidence exists to support or dismiss the existence of a creator, of sorts. The one thing I know is that there is much we do not know.

You don't seem to understand the problem with the logical fallacy commonly known as "appeal to ignorance".

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...

I'm not saying X is true, because you can't prove it's not.
I'm saying you can't know for sure that X is false, without proof.
Until the box is open, I can only have an opinion on whether the cat's alive or dead. I can't state my opinion as fact. Even if the odds are 1 in 10^9999999999999... that it's alive, it's still an opinion.

Unless you explicitly define "a creator, of sorts" you are using the ambiguity fallacy, which is an appeal to ignorance.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...

Thanks. I'll remember to do so, should I ever debate the existence of a creator. But this post is about free will. Let's stay on topic.
3RU7AL
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2017 8:55:29 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/19/2017 8:19:25 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/19/2017 2:35:40 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 11:39:11 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 10:57:46 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 9:58:10 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 8:47:48 PM, keithprosser wrote:
At 12/18/2017 7:31:00 PM, Furyan5 wrote:

Does Asgard exist? As Thor puts it, Asgard is wherever Asgardians call home.
Asgard is the home of an imaginary race. It exists, not as a place, but as a concept. Free will is a concept. An impossible concept, but a concept, none the less. This is what allows discussion. In the same vein, God exists. But so do unicorns and dragons.

I think we have been here before with 'reality'! I think its much better to say unequivoally that "the concept of god exists" and "god does not exist". God does not exist in any sensible vein, sense or meaning of 'exist'!

I agree, but still maintain this is an opinion. No empirical evidence exists to support or dismiss the existence of a creator, of sorts. The one thing I know is that there is much we do not know.

You don't seem to understand the problem with the logical fallacy commonly known as "appeal to ignorance".

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...

I'm not saying X is true, because you can't prove it's not.
I'm saying you can't know for sure that X is false, without proof.
Until the box is open, I can only have an opinion on whether the cat's alive or dead. I can't state my opinion as fact. Even if the odds are 1 in 10^9999999999999... that it's alive, it's still an opinion.

Unless you explicitly define "a creator, of sorts" you are using the ambiguity fallacy, which is an appeal to ignorance.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...

Thanks. I'll remember to do so, should I ever debate the existence of a creator. But this post is about free will. Let's stay on topic.

The same principle applies to free will.

The only way to defend the concept is with an ambiguity fallacy.
Furyan5
Posts: 1,516
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2017 11:01:58 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 12/19/2017 8:55:29 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/19/2017 8:19:25 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/19/2017 2:35:40 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 11:39:11 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 10:57:46 PM, 3RU7AL wrote:
At 12/18/2017 9:58:10 PM, Furyan5 wrote:
At 12/18/2017 8:47:48 PM, keithprosser wrote:
At 12/18/2017 7:31:00 PM, Furyan5 wrote:

Does Asgard exist? As Thor puts it, Asgard is wherever Asgardians call home.
Asgard is the home of an imaginary race. It exists, not as a place, but as a concept. Free will is a concept. An impossible concept, but a concept, none the less. This is what allows discussion. In the same vein, God exists. But so do unicorns and dragons.

I think we have been here before with 'reality'! I think its much better to say unequivoally that "the concept of god exists" and "god does not exist". God does not exist in any sensible vein, sense or meaning of 'exist'!

I agree, but still maintain this is an opinion. No empirical evidence exists to support or dismiss the existence of a creator, of sorts. The one thing I know is that there is much we do not know.

You don't seem to understand the problem with the logical fallacy commonly known as "appeal to ignorance".

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...

I'm not saying X is true, because you can't prove it's not.
I'm saying you can't know for sure that X is false, without proof.
Until the box is open, I can only have an opinion on whether the cat's alive or dead. I can't state my opinion as fact. Even if the odds are 1 in 10^9999999999999... that it's alive, it's still an opinion.

Unless you explicitly define "a creator, of sorts" you are using the ambiguity fallacy, which is an appeal to ignorance.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...

Thanks. I'll remember to do so, should I ever debate the existence of a creator. But this post is about free will. Let's stay on topic.

The same principle applies to free will.

The only way to defend the concept is with an ambiguity fallacy.

Lol, so I can say free will exists because will is free from choice. Choice free will.