A question to atheists

Originally posted by lucifershammer
You're setting the cart before the horse here. First you need to be clear whether free will exists or not before you consider the question of where it comes from. That way, you're proceeding by reason instead of relying on your emotions: "I feel X is not as inconsistent as Y". So, you'll need to set aside your prejudices (i.e. pre-judging) and ...[text shortened]... lf has no power to affect human choice (which is what happens in the absence of free will).

So consciousness is an incredibly complex series of energy fluctuations, I don't believe this precludes it having a control over other energy fluctuations.

Why are you so intent on adding the notion of 'meaning' here? What if life has no meaning; it just is? What if, on top of that we are granted, by some function of these energy fluctuations which cause self awareness, the ability to affect the univese around us? In doing so psychology is created, limited by the bological complexity to understand how it fits together and instead just exists. We create meaning as a way of moving through our energy states.

I'm getting way out of my normal thought areas now, I'm not sure I have the expereince to continue going down this route...

EDIT: Where's Hume when you need him? I require a game of billiards and a scotch to mull this over.

Originally posted by Starrman
EDIT: Where's Hume when you need him? I require a game of billiards and a scotch to mull this over.

Hume is the last person you need right now 🙂

Hume's view eliminates causality altogether - which means there is no such thing as physical laws. Thank God Hume's view was rejected - or science would have halted then and there.

EDIT: Meaning is essential for human functioning (as rational beings). Life cannot just "is" - you have to have a reason for doing things. You need a reason to go to the bathroom in the morning, to dress up for work, to type out particular words on this forum. Without meaning, human language is, well, meaningless.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Hume is the last person you need right now 🙂

Hume's view eliminates causality altogether - which means there is no such thing as physical laws. Thank God Hume's view was rejected - or science would have halted then and there.

But he loved a game of billiards, so he's alright by me.

Originally posted by Starrman
But he loved a game of billiards, so he's alright by me.

And his philosophy sounds like it was drawn up over his second bottle of the night.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Actually, if God is as powerful as most theists and deists agree He is, then your parents are not needed for you to come into existence.

While you control your external reactions to an experience, your internal control is quite limited (even over the conscious part of your mind). You cannot choose whether you feel anger or joy at a particular event - the best you can do is repress it by choosing not to acknowledge it.

In theory my parents weren't needed for my existence. In reality they were. My parents made me - not God.

My control is greater than you realize. Internal control is limited by experience and technique. Individuals who obtain the necessary skills and guidance can eventually regulate their passions without the need for actual repression. Anger and joy can also be acknowledged in a way which does not allow those emotions to control the self.

-JC

Originally posted by Churlant
In theory my parents weren't needed for my existence. In reality they were. My parents made me - not God.

My control is greater than you realize. Internal control is limited by experience and technique. Individuals who obtain the necessary skills and guidance can eventually regulate their passions without the need for actual repression. Anger and joy can also be acknowledged in a way which does not allow those emotions to control the self.

-JC

So your parents are soley responsible for your existence? Who or what is responsible for your parents existence?

Control is but an illusion. Everything you have is but a gift whether you credit God or your parents. Understanding this changes your perspective on such matters.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
If you believe that then, as Hal pointed out, free will is an illusion. Do you sincerely believe that you have absolutely no control over what you do? That the idea of "you" (to contol) is itself illusory?

I control certain things, but how I choose to exercise that control is determined by biochemistry and other internal and external physical factors.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
But that's the consequence of assuming that everything has a material or bio-chemical basis - it leaves us in a universe where free will simply doesn't exist. It's just a macro-level manifestation of atomic-level laws of physics. Even those things that we think are voluntary are not really so - they stem from the same physical laws that drive the invo ...[text shortened]...
Consider for a moment what this means for such things as morality and moral responsibility.

It means everyone deserves compassion and understanding, even if we are forced due to practicality to kill or imprison them, no matter how evil they appear to be.

Originally posted by whodey
So your parents are soley responsible for your existence? Who or what is responsible for your parents existence?

Control is but an illusion. Everything you have is but a gift whether you credit God or your parents. Understanding this changes your perspective on such matters.

Who is responsible for God's existence?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
And his philosophy sounds like it was drawn up over his second bottle of the night.

And yet, still better than yours.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Who is responsible for God's existence?

He is.

Originally posted by whodey
He is.

How can an entity can be responsible for it's own existence?

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
How can an entity can be responsible for it's own existence?

An entity confined to the dimension of time would have had to be created. An entity that created the dimension of time could have always existed.

Originally posted by whodey
An entity confined to the dimension of time would have had to be created. An entity that created the dimension of time could have always existed.

Why?

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Why?

Why what?