It seems people are recognizing that the brain and environment influence the choices we make. Given that, what proof do you have that anything exists beyond the brain and environment? Why is it necessary to come up with a magical construct to explain something that is already explainable? If the brain and environment can influence our choices 50% or 75% why not 100%?
[quote]Oleena wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Now - obviously, you either forgot or are choosing to ignore my explanation of the age of accountability. It is unique to each individual. If their physical development never reaches the point that their soul is able to understand/discern good from evil, then their free will could never make a morally culpable decision - they remain as innocent as the infant they really are in every sense of the emotional and mental state.
However, as they grow, learn and develop (which many have -some with extensive therapy, some with some truly incredible and loving foster/adopting parent) they will also grow in their ability to comprehend good and evil and will come to their age of accountability. At that point (whenever it comes for them) they will be held responsible for the decisions/choices that they make.
But the person who brought that pain and suffering . . . I’m gonna be on the front row to witness those judgments! And what if the person who did this to these children had the same thing happen to them as a child (which is highly likely in a lot of these cases)?
Most people who abuse children were highly abused themselves as kids. Pediphiles especially. I have worked with families were there are three generations of abuse right in my office, and half of the repetitive abuse is under the age of 18 (say one male, abused as a three year old, abuses his female 6 year old cousin. She has a good chance of growing up to do the same.)
Another topic- with some sociopaths there is almost no way to predict who they are and when they might turn into killer. I’ve seen children from every imaginable background turn into one. It’s almost like there’s something locked away deep in their DNA that just wakes up one day.
A third topic- if there really is something in their DNA, it would make sense that it’s been bred into there, as all of the major serial killers of our century have received numerous letters from women across the country asking them to impregnate them or trying to start a relationship. Scientists hypothesize that these women are trying to seek the top Alpha Male for their offspring. I can only imagine that this isn’t a new occurance and these men have been sought after by women in previous centuries as well.
And the people who help, love and work with these individuals - man, they are as brave as SEAL’s in my opinion and worthy of the same respect - there you go making me cry again . . .
[/quote]
Topic #1 - that’s my point exactly - someone chooses to abuse a child, then that child grows up and chooses to abuse a child, then that child grows up and chooses to never abuse a child . . . - identifying the fact that some people choose to mimic the behavior their were abused with does not remove the fact that they would have to choose to inflict the same abuse on someone else. If it were completely up to cause and effect - every abused child would become a child abuser - that is not the case and thus the causal relationship once again falls victim to the reality of free will choice.
Topic #2 - you are so close to seeing the truth here . . . there is no way to predict ='s there is no causal relationship - there is personal choice on the part of the human being. Don’t you see it yet?
Topic #3 - nope - again, have to disagree with you for the reasons listed above
[quote]forlife wrote:
EmilyQ wrote:
Yes, but I’m arguing that in these instances–religion vs. science and romantic love–there is no objective reality. There are only guesses, which may be educated guesses to some extent, but they are guesses nonetheless.
Science is nothing more than a systematic tool for guessing. You can never prove something to be incontrovertibly true. Science is driven by probability estimations, based on existing objective evidence and the ability to reliably replicate that evidence.
Religious people sometimes look at this, and conclude that since science cannot determine something to be 100% probable, it is useless and should be disregarded. But that is throwing the baby out with the bath water. While it’s true that science is imperfect, it is by far the most accurate, reliable system we have for discovering objective truth.
When we don’t know for certain, we don’t know. So all evidence one way or the other is subjective.
This is bordering on the logical fallacy I mentioned above. Not knowing something to be 100% true doesn’t imply that all hypotheses are therefore 0% true. Hypotheses have various levels of objective support, ranging from 0% to 99% probability of being true. You can reject a given hypothesis based on objective evidence, but you can never completely reject the null hypothesis. You can only fail to reject it.
You say that the Christians claim to have hard (objective) evidence, but I don’t see that.
Christians claim their god performs miracles. They say he answers their prayers. They insist he created the universe. Most of their beliefs bear on objective reality in some way, and many of them can be empirically tested.
For example, studies have been done on the efficacy of prayer. Heart patients that were prayed over were no more likely to recover than those that were not prayed over. The prayer accounted for 0% of the variance in health outcomes, so the prayer hypothesis was rejected in this particular study.
Of course, questions like the origin of the universe are more complex and difficult to empirically assess. Which is why you can’t completely dismiss the god hypothesis…but you can still choose to withhold judgment, based on the current lack of supporting empirical evidence.[/quote]
forlife, the problem here isn’t my fallacious logic. Your premise is flawed when you assume I–or anyone–has the same criteria for belief that you do. Science is not “a tool for guessing.” It seeks to prove or disprove theories through experimentation. Science attempts to limit tester bias. It seeks to build a base of evidence through testing and verifying data. Faith does not attempt to do the same.
I believe in the basic goodness of mankind, despite significant evidence to the contrary. It has nothing to do with science and everything to do with faith. Armed with this faith, I employ empirically tested strategies to positively impact people through my work. They’re separate things, faith and scientific knowledge. There is a time and a place for each.
Have you seen Secondhand Lions? In it, Robet Duvall’s character makes this speech (What Every Boy Needs to Know to be a Man):
“Sometimes the things that may or may not be true are the things a man needs to believe in the most. That people are basically good. That honour, courage, and virtue mean everything; that power and money, money and power mean nothing. That good always triumphs over evil. And I want you to remember this… that love… true love never dies! Remember that boy, remember that. Doesn’t matter if it is true or not, a man should believe in those things, because those are the things worth believing in. Got that?”
Mushy and saccharine though it is, evidence-based though it’s not, I agree with the sentiments contained therein. None of those things can be proven, but what motivation do I have to withhold judgment until they can?
[quote]mbm693 wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
mbm693 wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
mbm693 wrote:
What stands out to me in this situation is that these RAD children are the way they are solely because of their past experience. What I can’t see is how regular children are any different. They get different experiences, which may or may not prepare them for life as well adjusted adults, but I don’t see where they get any choice in how they behave. Even as adults, people are sill just products of the totality of their experience. Either they had traumatizing experiences that left them sociopaths, or they had good ones that made them a saint. But they are the way they are b/c of events beyond their control.
Good for you -you have some beliefs of your own.
I have a theory based on the available data.
Like I said - congratulations on having your own beliefs . . .
You’re not willing to consider or discuss the questions this raises? You’d rather needle me with statements like the one above?[/quote]
Not sure what part you want to discuss . . . I’ll shoot in the dark and hopefully hit the questions you meant to ask 
“these RAD children are the way they are” - developmentally stagnated - as I said if they develop and grow and mature, they will come to an age of accountability for them. If they cannot develop - they remain basically infants - was pretty sure I addressed this in my original response - so I am not sure what new point you are trying to make.
“I can’t see how regular children are any different” - they are not, they must grow and mature - when they reach the age of moral accountability (of which God is the judge - not me or you) the choices they then make in their free will are then held against God’s standards. Even as an infant, they have free will - it is the soul’s freedom to choose between alternatives - but there is no moral accountability because there is no discernment between right and wrong. I said this many pages back - we are judged as individuals based on our choices and on our amount of revealed truth.
No, people are not just the product of their experiences - you don’t even believe this yourself- you’d have to add in DNA, mental faculty, and a myriad of other variables - but as soon as you did add in one other influence you would have proven yourself wrong. And as I have said a hundred times - influence is not cause.
Tell you what - you try define who you are as an individual apart from the choices you have made . . .
[quote]Oleena wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
The eightfold path, the four noble truths, the Tao itself (a perfect descriptive of the Divine)? - why yes I do . . .
I just saw this and I’m interested in how you reconcile Taoist philosophy with christianity?
Mainly- the idea of opposites only being able to exist because of each other. For example, life wouldn’t be able to exist without death, and in thus they are the same thing. In this same light, evil couldn’t exist without good and vice versa. Also, another strong concept is that we are all the same thing- the same as the animals, the same as the air around us- there is basically no part, physical or spiritual where YOU end and the rest of IT begins. Therefore, you can’t seperate people from the rest of the universe. It all exists as one.
Also, Taoism teaches solitude and removing oneself from situations, whereas christianity teaches that you should try to convert others to your beliefs.
[/quote]
Ahh, love this discussion . . . as studied Taoism for several years and was absolutely fascinated by how close Lao Tzu kept coming to unraveling the mystery of existence - but always just and never quite closed the deal . . .
Yes, the potentiality of death is created with the existence of life - however, potentiality is not reality nor causality and this is true of every duality of the Tao - I love the idea of balance within philosophical construct and strive to achieve that balance every day. It is why I am not judgmental of other people.
You mistake the philosophical potentiality of the duality for being the same thing (your life/death example) - but they are not the same thing - they are the opposites of each other - you would need to expand your categorization to a word/concept that could include life and death - I haven’t found that word yet - have you?
Ahh - another favorite - the oneness of the universe . . . and this is where Taoism drove me back towards faith . . . God granted life to everything and sustains it by His will - none of the natural laws would work if the authority which established them failed to uphold and enforce them - and where I began to understand the omnipresence of the Divine . . . wow - thanks for taking me back. I had not meditated on those things for some time . . .
But back to your question - the identity of self, my answer = all life comes from God and all life will be returned to him . . . it’s as if Lao Tzu was standing right outside of Heaven and couldn’t open the door - but can we separate ourselves from the universe? Is the aspect of all having been created by, sustained by the Divine - no, we are connected. In the identity of self - yes, we are each unique creations - So the Tao, though slightly flawed still adds many wonderful understandings to my Faith.
As Bruce Lee said - adapt what is useful, reject what is useless. . .
[quote]Hodgie wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
forlife wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
So you don’t believe animals have an afterlife, only humans that are given eternal life by the breath of god?
If it takes the breath of god for creatures to live forever, how do you explain the people that suffer in hell for eternity?
Have you ever read Genesis?
Yes, but I’m curious about your interpretation of Genesis, not mine. Could you just answer the questions?
Fine, just for you. When God breathed into Adam the breathe of life - all subsequent human beings take part in that same eternal existence. Thus even those who suffer in hell are still recipients of the breathe of life (immortality of the soul)
Hi IrishSteel, I know you’ve got a lot of on your plate in this thread, but I’d let to get your opinion on the immortal soul doctrine described in Scripture. Here are some videos which I believe prove that the soul is not immortal. Instead, believers are given immortality only AFTER judgment day.
Your thoughts?
[/quote]
And the hits keep coming - lol - I’m going to start wearing a flak jacket when I sign on here
I cannot believe you made me watch those videos - seriously, could this guy be any more boring?
His understanding of scripture is so rudimentary that it is sad . . . really. I’m not even sure were to start with this guy . . .
OK, well, tell you what, I disagree with him and I will use just one scripture that tear his poor rationales to shred . . .
2 Corinthians 5:8 “We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.”
This moron cannot even distinguish between spiritual death and physical death . . .
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Life is not black and white in terms of these matters.
The most powerful thing that I’ve seen is that you can train people like you would an animal. This leads me to believe that free will is non-existant.
For example, I have a girlfriend who trained her husband to be interested/involved in topics such as saving the environment, which he used to hate, by giving him a blow job every time he showed any progress/openness of thought towards those topics. She also majored in animal behavior. He became an environmentalist. It was not his will to do this originally, but she conditioned him to associate the topic with pleasure (to this day, he has no idea what truly changed his mind on the topic), so now he seeks it out.
You can train anyone, quietly, and without their knowledge. They will then make decisions based on the patterns that you taught them to associate with pain or pleasure. This happens every day anyways, it’s just that some people do it on purpose.
[/quote]
LMAO - you proved free will choice and did not even know it! thanks O!
The poor man has chosen to be an environmentalist because he thinks environmentalists love giving blowjobs!
[quote]pat wrote:
Makavali wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
forlife wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Fine, just for you. When God breathed into Adam the breathe of life - all subsequent human beings take part in that same eternal existence. Thus even those who suffer in hell are still recipients of the breathe of life (immortality of the soul)
So you believe all humans have the breath of life, and thus will live forever, but that no other living thing on the planet has the breath of life (animals, birds, plants, germs, etc.)?
yes
Arrogance. Humans aren’t any more speical than Cockroaches.
Speak for yourself.[/quote]
I totally claimed I wasn’t arrogant.
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
pat wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Well, women are incapable of logic, right Push?
Only Wives.
Hey. That’s not funny.[/quote]
Truth hurts. Now back to your sewing.
Just kidding, please don’t hurt me.
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Jab1 wrote:
Makavali wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
forlife wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Fine, just for you. When God breathed into Adam the breathe of life - all subsequent human beings take part in that same eternal existence. Thus even those who suffer in hell are still recipients of the breathe of life (immortality of the soul)
So you believe all humans have the breath of life, and thus will live forever, but that no other living thing on the planet has the breath of life (animals, birds, plants, germs, etc.)?
yes
Arrogance. Humans aren’t any more speical than Cockroaches.
This is possibly the truest thing I’ve seen written in the PWI forum.
you’ve got a weird definition of truth then . . . like I told Mak, just go around telling this to the people you care about - Hi sweetie -you’re a special as a cockroach to me. . . Hi mom - saw a cockroach that reminded me of you . . . Hi Suzie -threw all your stuff into the basement - we’re gonna let the cockroaches have your room now . . . .[/quote]
You crack me up.
I never said I think of people as cockroaches, I just don’t think we’re anymore special in the grand scheme of things. After humanity is gone, I’m pretty sure they’ll still be around.
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Jab1 wrote:
Makavali wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
forlife wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Fine, just for you. When God breathed into Adam the breathe of life - all subsequent human beings take part in that same eternal existence. Thus even those who suffer in hell are still recipients of the breathe of life (immortality of the soul)
So you believe all humans have the breath of life, and thus will live forever, but that no other living thing on the planet has the breath of life (animals, birds, plants, germs, etc.)?
yes
Arrogance. Humans aren’t any more speical than Cockroaches.
This is possibly the truest thing I’ve seen written in the PWI forum.
you’ve got a weird definition of truth then . . . like I told Mak, just go around telling this to the people you care about - Hi sweetie -you’re a special as a cockroach to me. . . Hi mom - saw a cockroach that reminded me of you . . . Hi Suzie -threw all your stuff into the basement - we’re gonna let the cockroaches have your room now . . . .[/quote]
You crack me up.
I never said I think of people as cockroaches, I just don’t think we’re anymore special in the grand scheme of things. After humanity is gone, I’m pretty sure they’ll still be around.
[quote]forlife wrote:
It seems people are recognizing that the brain and environment influence the choices we make. Given that, what proof do you have that anything exists beyond the brain and environment? Why is it necessary to come up with a magical construct to explain something that is already explainable? If the brain and environment can influence our choices 50% or 75% why not 100%?[/quote]
ok FL - repeat with me: Influence is not cause . . . Influence is not cause . . . Influence is not cause . . . Influence is not cause . . . Influence is not cause . . . Influence is not cause . . . Influence is not cause . . .
It is not a magical construct - you identified it yourself “can influence OUR CHOICES” - free will is the soul’s freedom to choose.
let me try one more time - a person can be raised with the teaching that murder is wrong (nurture and education), can murder someone and be sent to prison for it (experience)- and yet still choose to kill someone in prison . . . choosing against all of the influences to kill again
even more simply - let’s use your construct. Let’s say DNA is a 5% influence, Parents are a 5% influence, Mrs. Kowalski in the 4th grade was a 5% influence, cute Becky Williams was a 5% influence, MacGyver was a 5% influence, and so on - what causes any one influence to have the deciding vote? Why that would be free will - the moral authority of the individual.
Regardless of how many influences you have -you still make decisions in free will. In proof of that - you can violate every influence in your life at a moments notice - why is that? it is because you still get to choose - and that’s the beauty of it all. The majority of abused children do not become child abusers themselves - why? Because they chose not to be that kind of person.
But here is why people do not want free will to be real:
- If free will is real - then I alone am responsible for my decisions.
- If free will is real - then I have a soul
- If I have a soul and I am responsible for my decisions - who am I responsible to?
- I have a soul and am responsible to the one who gave that soul life . . .
And that is all apart from any religion . . .
[quote]Mad_Duck wrote:
Oleena wrote:
so, she had no choice but to test her hypothesis on her husband?[/quote]
LOL. Everyone trains everyone else. Have you ever seen those old married couples where the woman is constantly complaining about everything the man does and the man never wants to be around the woman? Weird huh? Another good example- the parents fight all the time, and then yell at the son when he starts being disrespectful around the age of 14 and wonder why he ignores them/yells back instead of complying like he did when he was 4. The same child will then bend over backwards for the teacher who gives him honest, positive feedback and all but ignores his negative actions. Pretty soon all he’s doing is trying to please that teacher and the parents can’t figure out why.
My friend simply chose to give him blow jobs instead of fight about it. We’d have a lot more successful, happy marriges if more women learned from her example.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Jab1 wrote:
Makavali wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
forlife wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Fine, just for you. When God breathed into Adam the breathe of life - all subsequent human beings take part in that same eternal existence. Thus even those who suffer in hell are still recipients of the breathe of life (immortality of the soul)
So you believe all humans have the breath of life, and thus will live forever, but that no other living thing on the planet has the breath of life (animals, birds, plants, germs, etc.)?
yes
Arrogance. Humans aren’t any more speical than Cockroaches.
This is possibly the truest thing I’ve seen written in the PWI forum.
you’ve got a weird definition of truth then . . . like I told Mak, just go around telling this to the people you care about - Hi sweetie -you’re a special as a cockroach to me. . . Hi mom - saw a cockroach that reminded me of you . . . Hi Suzie -threw all your stuff into the basement - we’re gonna let the cockroaches have your room now . . . .
You crack me up.
I never said I think of people as cockroaches, I just don’t think we’re anymore special in the grand scheme of things. After humanity is gone, I’m pretty sure they’ll still be around.[/quote]
But then your treatment of people is based on a lie - you treat them as being more special than cockroaches when they really truly are not . . .
[quote]forlife wrote:
It seems people are recognizing that the brain and environment influence the choices we make. Given that, what proof do you have that anything exists beyond the brain and environment? Why is it necessary to come up with a magical construct to explain something that is already explainable? If the brain and environment can influence our choices 50% or 75% why not 100%?[/quote]
I stated earlier that people are assigning all kinds of attributes to soul that it does not posses. If the soul was the main arbitrator of your behavior you would not have freewill right? We act on the soul not the other way around.
The choice is provided, often times by environment. The brain analyzes the facts and an act of will exercises the choice. “Will” is not a physical thing. It may be postulated by the brain, but in it self is something different otherwise it would not be different.
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Life is not black and white in terms of these matters.
The most powerful thing that I’ve seen is that you can train people like you would an animal. This leads me to believe that free will is non-existant.
For example, I have a girlfriend who trained her husband to be interested/involved in topics such as saving the environment, which he used to hate, by giving him a blow job every time he showed any progress/openness of thought towards those topics. She also majored in animal behavior. He became an environmentalist. It was not his will to do this originally, but she conditioned him to associate the topic with pleasure (to this day, he has no idea what truly changed his mind on the topic), so now he seeks it out.
You can train anyone, quietly, and without their knowledge. They will then make decisions based on the patterns that you taught them to associate with pain or pleasure. This happens every day anyways, it’s just that some people do it on purpose.
LMAO - you proved free will choice and did not even know it! thanks O!
The poor man has chosen to be an environmentalist because he thinks environmentalists love giving blowjobs![/quote]
You missed the whole point- he had no idea that he’d been conditioned to associate the blowjobs with the topic, and therefore he didn’t choose to be an environmentalist. If your conclusion was true, then we would see no fighting in any relationship where the man was getting a bunch of blow jobs, because they would change his mind about everything. But infact, there are plenty of very sexual relationships that fizzle out due to differences of opinion.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Oleena wrote:
Life is not black and white in terms of these matters.
The most powerful thing that I’ve seen is that you can train people like you would an animal. This leads me to believe that free will is non-existant.
For example, I have a girlfriend who trained her husband to be interested/involved in topics such as saving the environment, which he used to hate, by giving him a blow job every time he showed any progress/openness of thought towards those topics. She also majored in animal behavior. He became an environmentalist. It was not his will to do this originally, but she conditioned him to associate the topic with pleasure (to this day, he has no idea what truly changed his mind on the topic), so now he seeks it out.
You can train anyone, quietly, and without their knowledge. They will then make decisions based on the patterns that you taught them to associate with pain or pleasure. This happens every day anyways, it’s just that some people do it on purpose.
LMAO - you proved free will choice and did not even know it! thanks O!
The poor man has chosen to be an environmentalist because he thinks environmentalists love giving blowjobs!
You missed the whole point- he had no idea that he’d been conditioned to associate the blowjobs with the topic, and therefore he didn’t choose to be an environmentalist. If your conclusion was true, then we would see no fighting in any relationship where the man was getting a bunch of blow jobs, because they would change his mind about everything. But infact, there are plenty of very sexual relationships that fizzle out due to differences of opinion.
[/quote]
Then I claim the whole story is BS . . .or the man is a mental 2 year old.
I have never met a grown man who could not figure out that every time he was saying something positive about the environment his woman was going to go down on him . . . trust me - we are always looking for ways to make this happen and testing all sorts of hypotheses to find the most effective methodology for accomplishing this. It would have taken me 2 times to develop a hypothesis and submit it to additional testing . . .
A new theory for your BS BJ story - Are you sure He didn’t train her to give a BJ every time he said something positive about the environment? LMAO!!!
[quote]Oleena wrote:
For example, I have a girlfriend who trained her husband to be interested/involved in topics such as saving the environment, which he used to hate, by giving him a blow job every time he showed any progress/openness of thought towards those topics.[/quote]
Hey, I did the same thing, only the way it works is that everyday I get a blowjob is a day my wife doesn’t get punched in the face.
Works great. Her last shiner is almost all healed up too. My guess is that next year, she won’t even think about skipping Mother’s Day.