Evidence for God from Science

I don't mind genuine questions being asked. I don't mind being challenged about what we believe and why I don't even mind people who believe differently than we do or do not believe in God,there is room for diverse view points but there needs to be some intellectual honesty behind it.A genuine desire to want to know the truth,otherwise we are just casting pearls before swine.

Jac3510 wrote:I am being nice.

To give him credit, Jac does recognize he isn't being nice (note the wink). And just to prove it, one need only look at some of the nice remarks he directed to and about me.

......."Stop being lazy."

......."Typical. Intellectual laziness at its best. I wish I could be surprised by your ilk anymore."

......."Let me try and help you see why your question is so stupid from a Christian perspective."

......."I suspect you are an intractable troll incapable of processing what is being said to you,"

......."He cut bait and ran a long time ago." [If anyone cares to check they will see this isn't true at all, no matter how
.......much Jac wishes it was]

......."The implication that in my mind you somehow merit me having any wishes concerning you just further
.......demonstrates your reading comprehension skills."

......."You are, in a word, boring."

......."As little as I care about you being here or not, I've got a feeling that He [god] cares far less."

Nice, huh!

So, what could have prompted such unprovoked hostility? Well, it wasn't really unprovoked at all. I provoked him. I happened to post the commonly accepted definition of freewill (see the examples I provided in one of the posts) which didn't agree with the one Jac made up. And, I then told him he was mistaken---which was my mistake. Be aware, Jac does not cotton to being told he's wrong. Not at all. Net result, it put Jac in his defensive/aggressive mode; essentially: "Who's this upstart to tell me I'm wrong? " Regaining his composure, Jac then dove into his conception of Christian freewill [Please note people, there is no such thing. Freewill doesn't come in religious forms, flavors, or sizes. Freewill only comes in ONE form, as one will discover upon looking into it]. In any case, *sigh* Jac was intent on disregarding my OP and continued trying to reconfigure the thread in terms of his "Christian freewill." Having absolutely no desire to get mired in such silliness, I ignored it and simply pursued the object of my OP: show me how freewill works in light of the argument I made. A bit miffed that I kept asking how free will worked, Jac finally responded with:

"To ask "how" is to misunderstand what it is." So, no asking how freewill works. Yet in spite of this brilliant display of profundity, surprisingly, Jac ignores it---his very own perspicacious insight---and goes right ahead to answer the "how." What? Yup. Jac?? Yup. To the unstated but necessarily implied question, he says, " 'How' is answered by knowing what it is." And just what is it? He says it "is a natural power or capacity of the human, and that in virtue of his nature." So, does this then mean Jac misunderstands freewill? Yup. He asked and even answered the "how." Of course his misunderstanding comes as no surprise, it was quite evident much earlier on. My condolences Jac.

But I think this is enough for now, although it's been a lot of fun, and in no small thanks to Jac himself. Thank you Jac3510.

B. W. wrote:A simple multiple choice question disproves Hard Determinism.

Care to share?

There is a big difference between the free moral agency of choice and hard determinism.

Yes there is. A gargantuan difference.

Audacity wrote:

Jac3510 wrote:I am being nice.

To give him credit, Jac does recognize he isn't being nice (note the wink). And just to prove it, one need only look at some of the nice remarks he directed to and about me.

......."Stop being lazy."

......."Typical. Intellectual laziness at its best. I wish I could be surprised by your ilk anymore."

......."Let me try and help you see why your question is so stupid from a Christian perspective."

......."I suspect you are an intractable troll incapable of processing what is being said to you,"

......."He cut bait and ran a long time ago." [If anyone cares to check they will see this isn't true at all, no matter how
.......much Jac wishes it was]

......."The implication that in my mind you somehow merit me having any wishes concerning you just further
.......demonstrates your reading comprehension skills."

......."You are, in a word, boring."

......."As little as I care about you being here or not, I've got a feeling that He [god] cares far less."

Nice, huh!

So, what could have prompted such unprovoked hostility? Well, it wasn't really unprovoked at all. I provoked him. I happened to post the commonly accepted definition of freewill (see the examples I provided in one of the posts) which didn't agree with the one Jac made up. And, I then told him he was mistaken---which was my mistake. Be aware, Jac does not cotton to being told he's wrong. Not at all. Net result, it put Jac in his defensive/aggressive mode; essentially: "Who's this upstart to tell me I'm wrong? " Regaining his composure, Jac then dove into his conception of Christian freewill [Please note people, there is no such thing. Freewill doesn't come in religious forms, flavors, or sizes. Freewill only comes in ONE form, as one will discover upon looking into it]. In any case, *sigh* Jac was intent on disregarding my OP and continued trying to reconfigure the thread in terms of his "Christian freewill." Having absolutely no desire to get mired in such silliness, I ignored it and simply pursued the object of my OP: show me how freewill works in light of the argument I made. A bit miffed that I kept asking how free will worked, Jac finally responded with:

"To ask "how" is to misunderstand what it is." So, no asking how freewill works. Yet in spite of this brilliant display of profundity, surprisingly, Jac ignores it---his very own perspicacious insight---and goes right ahead to answer the "how." What? Yup. Jac?? Yup. To the unstated but necessarily implied question, he says, " 'How' is answered by knowing what it is." And just what is it? He says it "is a natural power or capacity of the human, and that in virtue of his nature." So, does this then mean Jac misunderstands freewill? Yup. He asked and even answered the "how." Of course his misunderstanding comes as no surprise, it was quite evident much earlier on. My condolences Jac.

But I think this is enough for now, although it's been a lot of fun, and in no small thanks to Jac himself. Thank you Jac3510.

Wow, let's not turn this into a pissing contest thanks gentlemen

You read too much into a wink, Audacity (not surprising, given your brief history here). I really am being nice to you. No sarcasm in it. You're like the kid who says EVILUSHUN KANT B TRU CUZ DER R STEEL MUNKIES MWAHHAHAHAHAHAAHAA.

The sad thing is less the "argument" you are making and more your confidence (that I have no doubt that you really and truly have--that's what makes this so terribly pitiful) that you understand what it is your critiquing. That is what I said is boring. You have misread my intentions from the beginning, despite me being clear about it. Why would I rush to answer questions that have no relevance to reality? Your burning down straw men. I'm not going to try to put that fire out because I don't care. I've told you repeatedly that you don't even know the right definitions of words, and then, you absurdly interpret my comments to you as an attempt to answer your questions, see that there is no answer to the actual question you asked, and therefore claim that what I'm saying somehow lacks understanding or is irrelevant. Again, go back to the monkey/evolution example. When someone politely explains to such an idiot about genetic mutation, what happens when the kid replies - AND HAH SEE U CAN'T EVEN ADDRESS THE MONKEY PROBLME U IJUT!? Do you expect the person to explain again why the "monkey problem" doesn't exist?

And that's exactly what you are. Your questions are sophomoric. Your ignorance and hubris would be astounding were it not so utterly typical.

What you need, my misguided friend, is not an argument. It's a counselor. And no, I'm not being snarky or mean. I'm telling you an honest truth. Your reactions here speak to a much deeper, visceral response that are rooted in some negative experiences you've had. And I'm sorry for that.

I actually do get where Audacity is coming from, even though I don't agree with his conclusion. He is certainly not alone with this train of thought. Freud, Einstein along with modern evolutionary psychologists believe there is no free will, apart from an illusionary deception.
To some extent this is true.
I do ultimately think there is free will, so bear with me.

I tend to look at this more from a psychological perspective than a philosophical one.
We function from both the sub conscious and conscious mind.
With the sub conscious being responsible for majority of thought, or more accurately majority of decision making. This is not an exact science but it is suggested that it lies between 80-95%. Some very interesting but not conclusive studies since the 70's have shown that milliseconds before we make a decision consciously our sub conscious has already made the decision.
The sub conscious processes info at a rate that dwarfs the info we process consciously, 100 fold. It takes in everything, 24/7, whether we are aware of it or not and most often weren't not.
But it operates like a voice or video recorder in being that it records the info, visual, emotional, ect and merely programs or imprints it into our datadbase of memory.
It does not distinguish between reality or logic, it just processes the info. Something does not have to be true or even to the betterment of us as it doesn't distinguish it just processes and stores.

Majority of this programming is done from childhood. When the brain is developing and is initially storing memories and all stimuli. This is when neurons and synapses within the brain start storing and processing information. As we move into adulthood those imprints, brain connections have already been stored in our database of memory. Which is why having a relatively stable, nurturing upbringing has such a major impact on our everyday choices. We recognise the damage that is seen in adults who have experienced abuse and neglect. It is said often 'it changes who they were meant to be' what this means is their database of memory is set in a very negative way.
This is seen when you look at the generational violence, neglect and negative experiences that exists within lineage.
Studies show us if you were abused, you are more likely to abuse. Jails are full of people that are damaged from childhood and go on to commit the legacy of what they have seen.
We see that come through in lesser terms, why do we do what we know we shouldn't, or when we know better? How many times have we said to ourselves 'I knew I shouldn't have done that, acted that way but we did anyway. Why are habits so hard to break?
Because we are acting within the sub conscious.
Kinda of like on autopilot.
And that is what the sub conscious is responsible for. We don't consciously think about breathing, most of the time we are not aware. How many times have you driven home on your common route and realised you were away with the fairies the entire time. Driving on auto pilot.
We are often operating on auto pilot.
Or operating on a level of sub consciousness.
I think it does navigate majority of our decisions and behaviour. What we tell ourselves internally imprints on our sub conscious, and the person we chat to the most is ourselves. What we tell ourselves becomes our reality. Which is a hard thing to program against when early experiences of childhood are already dictating our behaviour.
Have you ever known someone lost in depression, their internal dialogue is constantly telling them thier not worthy. It doesn't matter how many times you tell them otherwise they are lost in their own reality. Anorexia is an example of how the sub conscious mind believes what it's told even its not rational but it simply stores the info programmed into it, that reality is distorted.

Psychology deals everyday with people who behave on a sub conscious level that inhibits their everyday people lives. OCD, extreme phobias, anxiety ect. These people know intellectually and consciously that it's not rational but they cannot control their behaviour.
It's like telling yourself 'don't think of a green balloon'
Too late
The mind has already processed the info even if it's in the negative, because it's just processing the thought.
Which is why when we try to change our behaviour by thinking 'don't do this, or don't do that' regardless of how well meaning they are it so often doesn't work.

So if we are a result of input that dictates behaviour then is freewill nothing more than an illusion?
I don't think so.
Regardless of whether we are largely programmed by our sub conscious, molecular biologists and study into neurobiology show that those synapses that program us can be effectively reprogrammed.
That really is the crux of psychology in human behaviour. Changing our perceptions of who we are, thus changing behaviour. That is the body of work that works with OCD, extreme phobias ect. By gradually implementing stimuli the mind sends a different response to fear that re programmes the response.

The point being that conscious thinking affects sub conscious programming. When you alter the input you alter the output.
That is free will.
We are free to choose our conscious thoughts, which is the basis of not only logical thinking but where creativity stems.
That arguably 5-20% is the realm of free thought, analytical thinking, logical deductions, creativity and spontaneity which every time we delve into results in our sub conscious being somewhat forced only but it's limitations to merely record those thoughts.
When we actively think, question, read, and challenge ourselves then we are being aware.
Not living in autopilot.
The biggest hurdle isn't questioning others when we think in terms of belief but actively questioning ourselves.
Growth is an inward struggle that eventually projects outwards.