[quote]forlife wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
What is her exact question?
It’s similar to a core issue I remember struggling with as an undergraduate at BYU (the Lord’s University):
If god created all things, then god is ultimately responsible for all things. We tell ourselves that god created us with free will. But if that is the case, why did god create some people who would choose to use their free will to worship him, while others would choose to use their free will to defy him? That special quality, which causes certain people to choose righteousness, was given by god to those people and not to others. How is that benevolent? Why would god not give that special quality to all of his creations, and instead only give it to some of them?[/quote]
So now: if we choose not to exercise our free will, it’s God’s fault?
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
So now: if we choose not to exercise our free will, it’s God’s fault?
[/quote]
How could it be our own fault when the underlying attributes causing us to make one choice vs. another choice were themselves given to us by god? Do you see what I’m saying?
If not, ask yourself this question:
What is the original cause for the choices we make? What attribute is it that leads us to make one vs. another choice?
[quote]forlife wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
So now: if we choose not to exercise our free will, it’s God’s fault?
How could it be our own fault when the underlying attributes causing us to make one choice vs. another choice were themselves given to us by god? Do you see what I’m saying?
[/quote]
I see exactly what your saying. This is just a roundabout way of saying that you don’t think free will exists.
[quote]forlife wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
What is her exact question?
It’s similar to a core issue I remember struggling with as an undergraduate at BYU (the Lord’s University):
If god created all things, then god is ultimately responsible for all things. We tell ourselves that god created us with free will. But if that is the case, why did god create some people who would choose to use their free will to worship him, while others would choose to use their free will to defy him? That special quality, which causes certain people to choose righteousness, was given by god to those people and not to others. How is that benevolent? Why would god not give that special quality to all of his creations, and instead only give it to some of them?[/quote]
and that is the source of your error - God did not give some an enhanced or special free will to choose and deny that enhanced or special free will to others . . . we all have the same free will . . .
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
I see exactly what your saying. This is just a roundabout way of saying that you don’t think free will exists. [/quote]
Or rather, that only god has free will. How would you explain it otherwise? What is ultimately responsible for the choices that we make?
Most Christians say it is the soul. Fine, but who made our souls? And if some souls are type A, which choose righteousness and other souls are type B, which choose wickedness, why wouldn’t god make all of them type A? How is that fair for the poor souls who are made type B, and get to spend an eternity of suffering because of it?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Roger Sperry studied the right and left brain hemispheres and found the mind has a causal power independent of the brain’s activities. * “Changed Concepts of Brain and Consciousness”[/quote]
When I look up that article, I end up in “The Journal of Religion & Science”. Sigh. Not a good sign. Still, to be fair, I downloaded a sample copy from the site (http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118495004/home) and checked it out. Right off the bat, he goes after evolution and manages little except to show his lack of understanding of the theory. A few paragraphs in, God makes an appearance and becomes a regular fixture of the discussion.
Sorry man, but the verdict on that one is “apologetics thinly disguised to look like science.”
Ok. That shows that belief or decisions are not “spot” activities that can be induced by electrical stimulation at some “place”, but little else. Did Penfield jump to the conclusion that the mind was otherwordly, or are you making that conclusion for him? The brain is made up of about 100 billion neurons; it’s quite likely that many processes involve billions of them in particular sequences… the chances of someone reproducing a complex process by random electrical stimulation is pretty much null.
So yeah, the brain is complex. That doesn’t mean the mind is supernatural though.
Could we have references to those “many brain scientists”? Go to the source so to speak.
Now count how many times the word “theology” appears in those search results. Contrast that number to the number of times the word “science” appears.
I rest my case.
You’ll have to elaborate on that one, I’m not really sure what you’re referring to.
Do you have any sources that don’t include the words God, religion, theology, etc? If so, please use those. Currently, what you’re trying to pass off as scientific research is nothing of the sort, or takes scientific research and adds conclusion that were not reached by the scientists themselves.
Weak, man, very weak. I don’t want to be mean, but for all your bluster and parading, when we get to brass tacks, you really have nothing.
[quote]forlife wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
I see exactly what your saying. This is just a roundabout way of saying that you don’t think free will exists.
Or rather, that only god has free will. How would you explain it otherwise? What is ultimately responsible for the choices that we make?
Most Christians say it is the soul. Fine, but who made our souls? And if some souls are type A, which choose righteousness and other souls are type B, which choose wickedness, why wouldn’t god make all of them type A? How is that fair for the poor souls who are made type B, and get to spend an eternity of suffering because of it?
[/quote]
So the very fact that each person is free to choose (and must choose) between good or evil, and that some will choose evil, means that free will doesn’t exist? Is that your argument?
An interesting comment by Richard Dawkins, a confirmed atheist, on the correlation between religious belief and intelligence.
I’m not sure I agree with the first part, but the last sentence is striking.
[i]Is there any correlation, positive or negative, between intelligence and tendency to be religious? A recent article by Paul G. Bell in the Mensa magazine provides some straws in the wind. Mensa, as you know, is an international organization for people with very high IQ. And from a meta-analysis of the literature, Bell concludes that, I quote, “Of 43 studies carried out since 1927 on the relationship between religious belief and one’s intelligence or educational level, all but four found an inverse connection. That is, the higher one’s intelligence or educational level, the less one is likely to be religious.” Well, I haven’t seen the original 42 studies and I can’t comment on that meta-anaysis but I would like to see more studies done along those lines.
But let me know show you some data that have been properly published and analyzed on one special group, namely, top scientists In 1998, Larson and Witham polled the cream of American scientists, those who’d been honored by election to the National Academy of Sciences, and among this select group, belief in a personal God dropped to a shattering seven percent. About 20 percent are agnostic, and the rest could fairly be called atheists. Similar figures obtained for belief in personal immortality. Among biological scientists, the figures are even lower, 5.5 percent only, believe in God. Physical scientists: it’s 7.5 percent. I’ve not seen corresponding figures for elite scholars in other fields, such history or philosophy, but I’d be surprised if they were different.
So, we’ve reached a truly remarkable situation, a grotesque mismatch between the American intelligentsia and the American electorate. A philosophical opinion about the nature of the universe, which is held by the vast majority of top American scientists and probably the majority of the intelligentsia generally, is so abhorrent to the American electorate that no candidate for popular election dare affirm it in public. If I’m right, this means that high office in the greatest country in the world is barred to the very people best qualified to hold it, the intelligentsia, unless they are prepared to lie about their beliefs. To put it bluntly, American political opportunities are heavily loaded against those who are simultaneously intelligent and honest. [/i]
Surely Push will be quoting Psalms 14:1 and Romans 1:22 at any moment.
[quote]forlife wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
I see exactly what your saying. This is just a roundabout way of saying that you don’t think free will exists.
Or rather, that only god has free will. How would you explain it otherwise? What is ultimately responsible for the choices that we make?
Most Christians say it is the soul. Fine, but who made our souls? And if some souls are type A, which choose righteousness and other souls are type B, which choose wickedness, why wouldn’t god make all of them type A? How is that fair for the poor souls who are made type B, and get to spend an eternity of suffering because of it?
[/quote]
again - your error is in assuming that those who choose to deny God have a different free will or some inherent defect that causes them to choose to deny God - that is not free will. You miss the concept entirely. There is no type A or type B soul - there is only one type and each person can choose to deny God or not - entirely free of any constraining influence
But here I go wasting my time when you do not care about my views - sorry, I’ll go back to messing with Lixy and Orion now . .
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
and that is the source of your error - God did not give some an enhanced or special free will to choose and deny that enhanced or special free will to others . . . we all have the same free will . . . [/quote]
You’re not answering the question though. What causes us to exercise our free will in a righteous or wicked direction? What is the core cause for that choice?
[quote]forlife wrote:
IrishSteel, are you saying that you don’t believe god will send the majority of people to hell or that you don’t believe doing so displays a lack of benevolence?[/quote]
I don’t know who or how many are going to hell or heaven. I am not even sure what heaven and hell really are. I sense you have a better chance of making it if you try to live a good life, and love and respect God and your fellow man, then if you give God the finger. But who knows, everybody is here for a purpose, some people’s purpose may be to be an asshole for all we know.
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
So the very fact that each person is free to choose (and must choose) between good or evil, and that some will choose evil, means that free will doesn’t exist? Is that your argument? [/quote]
No, you’re not answering my question:
What is ultimately responsible for the choices we make?
[quote]forlife wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
So the very fact that each person is free to choose (and must choose) between good or evil, and that some will choose evil, means that free will doesn’t exist? Is that your argument?
No, you’re not answering my question:
What is ultimately responsible for the choices we make?
I’m looking for your take on that question.[/quote]
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
again - your error is in assuming that those who choose to deny God have a different free will or some inherent defect that causes them to choose to deny God - that is not free will. You miss the concept entirely. There is no type A or type B soul - there is only one type and each person can choose to deny God or not - entirely free of any constraining influence[/quote]
Then what is your explanation, other than a vaporous assertion that everyone has free will?
Fine, everyone has free will. But if that is true, what quality is ultimately responsible for the exercise of that free will? What causes one person to make a righteous choice, and another person to make a wicked choice?
[quote]forlife wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
and that is the source of your error - God did not give some an enhanced or special free will to choose and deny that enhanced or special free will to others . . . we all have the same free will . . .
You’re not answering the question though. What causes us to exercise our free will in a righteous or wicked direction? What is the core cause for that choice?[/quote]
AHHH - that is what I am saying - your are looking for a cause for our decision - but that is the problem - there is no cause for our decision, that negates the concept of free will.
I am offered multiple choices and I freely choose the one I choose - there is no constraining cause, I could choose A as easily as B as easily as C. That is free will.
Anything that causes me to choose becomes the responsible party for my choice - not me.
That is where you are apparently hung up - you look for a cause for your choice, something that makes you choose a certain thing,and then seek to blame god because he must have put that cause in you - that is not the case - that is not free will!
There is no cause - there is simply you and what you choose.
[quote]forlife wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
again - your error is in assuming that those who choose to deny God have a different free will or some inherent defect that causes them to choose to deny God - that is not free will. You miss the concept entirely. There is no type A or type B soul - there is only one type and each person can choose to deny God or not - entirely free of any constraining influence
Then what is your explanation, other than a vaporous assertion that everyone has free will?
Fine, everyone has free will. But if that is true, what quality is ultimately responsible for the exercise of that free will? What causes one person to make a righteous choice, and another person to make a wicked choice? [/quote]
Nothing . . . that’s it - there is nothing that causes you to make a righteous or unrighteous choice - there is just what you choose. You can have A or you can have B - you took A - that’s it.
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
I am for mine. You are for yours. [/quote]
So who made “I” and “You”? What part of “I” and “You” didn’t come from god? If that core quality to “I” and “You”, which ultimately drives the decisions we make, was created by god, then how is god not directly responsible for those decisions?
[quote]forlife wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
again - your error is in assuming that those who choose to deny God have a different free will or some inherent defect that causes them to choose to deny God - that is not free will. You miss the concept entirely. There is no type A or type B soul - there is only one type and each person can choose to deny God or not - entirely free of any constraining influence
Then what is your explanation, other than a vaporous assertion that everyone has free will?
Fine, everyone has free will. But if that is true, what quality is ultimately responsible for the exercise of that free will? What causes one person to make a righteous choice, and another person to make a wicked choice? [/quote]
Anything to deny the ontological reality of the person, eh? S/he’s either just a bunch of swirling chemicals, or merely part of the will of the collective.
