I have been absent but not absent thinking about the world we live in. In this thread I am posting something I have worked on for 6 months. It began when my preacher son sent me a quotation by my favorite liar (go look up the frog and princess episode) Richard Dawkins. Dawkins made an interesting point which set me to thinking about things. I don't want Jorge involved in this thread if I have any say about it. He never adds anything substantive. Anyway, I will see if this will fit into my allotted number of characters. I will discuss the Newtonian view first. In a second post I will discuss the most often claimed escape clause to the Newtonian problems--quantum mechanics and show why it won't actually allow escape from these problems. I will watch and see what stones are thrown my way.
Free Will, God and Scientific Knowledge
By Glenn R. Morton copyright 2016
I will show why the classical material position that there is no free will leads to a refutation of science. I will then show that the addition of an entity outside of our universe allows scientific knowledge to be trustworthy. Then I will show why quantum mechanical indeterminism does not allow escape from this problem and finally show a second problem that quantum mechanics causes for the acceptance of scientific data and theories.
Definitions
Materialism is the view that there are no causes except material causes in the universe. Laws of Physics describe these causal relations.
Scientism is the view that scientific study of material causation is the only way to true knowledge. Science studies causation and is the arbiter of what is real and what is not real.
Logic, which includes mathematics, is the only valid methodology science uses to determine material causation.
Neither materialism nor scientism would accept immaterial causation or invalid chains of logic.
Free will is only an issue for something that possesses a Mind. Daniel Dennett says:
For the purposes of this discussion, free will is a voluntary intentional action. Intentional action requires an 'intender', something that intends the action to happen. That intender seems to be our conscious mind. When I leave my house, all my neighbors can observe my body getting in my car and starting to drive off. That is objective knowledge. But what they can't observe is my intentions about where I am going to go. My intention is subjective and known only to me. It is a real but unobservable thing. The neighbors can't see my intention to go to the store to buy habanero peppers. My intent to buy habaneros is not random in the sense that the thing I am going to buy changes every second on my trip to the store.
Why science needs a soul (Newton first)
Assumption 1. Properly derived chains of logic and mathematics allows no contradictions. (If we deny this assumption, then we have no means of gaining knowledge. Consider the case of a contradiction which allows anything to be proven. (search 'John is a wise fool')
Assumption 2. Matter follows the rules of logic and mathematics revealed to humans via the scientific method.. (This seems to be an observational fact. This is the assumption that physical laws we have discovered govern the universe.)
Conclusion 1. Therefore the true view of the universe is logically consistent and allow no contradictions. (To deny this is to say that logic and math don't govern the universe. If they don't then what does?)
Assumption 3. Atoms are part of the universe.
Conclusion 2. Atoms in our bodies are governed by the laws of the universe.
Assumption 4. Atoms are required to follow those laws. For atoms and molecules, there is no escape from the inexorable dictates of the laws of the universe. (One can't deny this if one accepts assumption #2 and #3)
Assumption 5. Our bodies and brains are made of atoms which follow the laws of the universe. (The materialist assumption)
Assumption 6. Our mind or set of mental states is an epiphenomenon of the arrangement of matter in our brain.
Explanation: Mental states arise from a collection of atoms organized in a particular pattern entailing our knowledge, experience and memories beliefs, all of which follow the laws of the universe because the underlying matter follows the universe. (Given that each of us have different memories and experiences which can only be encoded in the brain via different arrangements of matter, this seems easy to accept).
Conclusion 3. Beliefs are mental states and arise in the epiphenomenon of the matter in our brain from the particular arrangement of the atoms in the brain which follow the laws of the universe. Beliefs, memories, experience etc are entirely due to an arrangement of matter. (This follows from assumption 5 mental thoughts are the state of the epiphenomenon of matter).
Assumption 7: Actions arise from pre-existing mental states. One thinks of an apple before reaching out taking one and subsequently eating the juicy fruit.
Conclusion 4. The previous chain of logic shows therefore, that actions are based ultimately on the laws of the universe which admit of no contradiction or escape. A murder is nothing more than the actualization of the thoughts and intensions in the mind of the murderer which were caused by the particular arrangement of matter in his brain, which was caused by the laws of the universe. (follows from #7).
Conclusion 5. Actions have no escape from the inexorable demands of the laws of physics and the arrangement of matter which underlies the mental states. Therefore, actions have no free will. The mental state is caused by the arrangement of matter, and the action is caused by the mental state. The individual is forced to do, believe and experience what the patterns of atoms in his brain require, and those atoms, in turn, are required follow the laws of the universe.
This position is best summed up by Dawkins:
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/10/who_wrote_richard_dawkinss_new002783.html
Let's extend this reasoning a bit. If conclusions #4 and #5 are true, then it seems the following must also be true.
Conclusion 6-1. then the belief that we have or don't have free will is held, not because of evidence but because of the arrangement of the atoms in the brain.
Conclusion 6-2. The belief in the efficacy of logic is held, again, not because it is actually efficacious, but because of the arrangement of the atoms in the brain. We can't actually know if logic tells us anything true because it is an arrangement of atoms and molecules which force us to believe in the efficacy of logic.
Conclusion 6-3. Belief in atheism, theism or pantheism, scientific theories and love for family and everything we think we know, are held not because the person believes or loves, but because the arrangement of atoms require said beliefs or love. Evidence does not enter into the equation here.
Conclusion 6-4. Therefore, reality cannot be known because each and every belief is held because of the arrangement of atoms which require us to believe and 'know' what we know. We do not independently confirm scientific data or hold a single opinion that our molecules don't force us to hold. Evidence is meaningless.
Conclusion 6-5. Our memories don't represent actual events but are forced upon us by the atoms in our brain being arranged in a particular pattern which followed the laws of the universe. Our parents might not really have existed. The past scientific experiments we use as the building blocks of science might not have ever been carried out but merely be an arrangement of matter in our brain. Truth is a meaningless concept, since every belief and action is predetermined by the arrangement of our molecules.
Conclusion 6-6 Science is impossible; knowledge is impossible; history is impossible. Science, knowledge and history cannot possibly be proclaimed true because it is the arrangement of atoms in our minds that makes us hold that the facts of science, knowledge and history is true, not the data.
As Tony Rothman and George Sudarshan say:
Paradox 1: If science is impossible, as conclusion 6-6 requires, then assumption 2, the assumption that observational physical laws govern the universe, cannot be held to be true. Knowledge of those laws arise from science, but if science is believed only because of the arrangement of atoms in our brains, then there is no validity to the laws of science. And because of that this chain of logic fails because science must be true for this chain of logic to be true. But if this chain of logic is true, science is impossible.
But, if we change assumption 6 and say:
Assumption 6a Beliefs and judgments about data arise from analyses accomplished by an non-observable entity, i.e. a soul, which is not rooted in our observable universe, and thus not constrained by the inexorable demands of the physical universe. This entity may be rooted in dark matter or some other substrate which is unobservable. That entity is free to consider all the information, and choose the appropriate position. The information is then transferred to the observable world and the atoms put into appropriate patterns for those beliefs.
Conclusion 3a. Beliefs held by the individual, are not caused by the arrangement of matter in their brain but are the result of actions and beliefs accomplished by another entity based in some other substrate, i. e. dark matter, immaterial soul etc. The particular arrangement of matter in the brain is logically later than the decision-making event.
Assumption 7a. Actions are the result of decisions made in the unobservable substrate which is free of the laws of the universe. As an aside, Libet's experiment which purports to show that consciousness is not involved in decision making and thus claims that we have no free will, might be explained within the framework presented here. The unconscious mind IS the unobservable entity in action. It makes the decision and transfers knowledge to our bodies.
Conclusion 6-1a. If this is true, then the belief that we have or don't have free will is held because of Logic and evidence, and because of decisions made by the unobservable entity which then encodes an appropriate arrangement of matter in our brains. Libet's electrical potential comes into play here. The encoding of our brains is a result of the decisions by the unobservable entity, NOT because the atoms in our brains constrain us. It is the freedom of the unobservable entity based within dark matter or classical soul, which allows us to truly be free.
Conclusion 6-2a. Belief in the efficacy of logic is held because logic works, not because we are forced into a belief that logic works by the arrangement of our atoms.
Conclusion 6-3. Belief in atheism, theism or pantheism, scientific theories and love for family and everything we think we know, are held because an entity free of the inexorable demands of this universe's laws allows a free decision on what it chooses to believe. The person believes or loves, based on the evidence he has at hand. Evidence and data are extremely important.
Conclusion 6-4. Therefore, reality can be known because each and every belief is held because of the free consideration of evidence which is weighed by use of logic and math which actually works and is not forced on us by the arrangement of matter in our brain We can and do independently confirm scientific data or hold opinions that are well considered.
Conclusion 6-5. Our memories do represent actual events because we are free from the forced mental states the materialist position requires. Our parents did exist. Past scientific experiments we use as the building blocks of science were carried out. Truth is, if not absolutely obtainable, at least assymptotically obtainable.
Conclusion 6-6 Science is possible; knowledge is possible; history is possible. Science, knowledge and history can be proclaimed true because data is actually examined, and an efficacious logical chain is applied to the problems at hand.
Conclusion 7. Scientific and historical knowledge can be real if and only if there is an entity free of the laws of the universe which can examine the data and make a free unhindered, unconstrained decision.. The materialist position is self-defeating. Our choice seems to be between having no basis upon which to believe anything is true or having a soul.
Free Will, God and Scientific Knowledge
By Glenn R. Morton copyright 2016
I will show why the classical material position that there is no free will leads to a refutation of science. I will then show that the addition of an entity outside of our universe allows scientific knowledge to be trustworthy. Then I will show why quantum mechanical indeterminism does not allow escape from this problem and finally show a second problem that quantum mechanics causes for the acceptance of scientific data and theories.
Definitions
Materialism is the view that there are no causes except material causes in the universe. Laws of Physics describe these causal relations.
Scientism is the view that scientific study of material causation is the only way to true knowledge. Science studies causation and is the arbiter of what is real and what is not real.
Logic, which includes mathematics, is the only valid methodology science uses to determine material causation.
Neither materialism nor scientism would accept immaterial causation or invalid chains of logic.
Free will is only an issue for something that possesses a Mind. Daniel Dennett says:
For the purposes of this discussion, free will is a voluntary intentional action. Intentional action requires an 'intender', something that intends the action to happen. That intender seems to be our conscious mind. When I leave my house, all my neighbors can observe my body getting in my car and starting to drive off. That is objective knowledge. But what they can't observe is my intentions about where I am going to go. My intention is subjective and known only to me. It is a real but unobservable thing. The neighbors can't see my intention to go to the store to buy habanero peppers. My intent to buy habaneros is not random in the sense that the thing I am going to buy changes every second on my trip to the store.
Why science needs a soul (Newton first)
Assumption 1. Properly derived chains of logic and mathematics allows no contradictions. (If we deny this assumption, then we have no means of gaining knowledge. Consider the case of a contradiction which allows anything to be proven. (search 'John is a wise fool')
Assumption 2. Matter follows the rules of logic and mathematics revealed to humans via the scientific method.. (This seems to be an observational fact. This is the assumption that physical laws we have discovered govern the universe.)
Conclusion 1. Therefore the true view of the universe is logically consistent and allow no contradictions. (To deny this is to say that logic and math don't govern the universe. If they don't then what does?)
Assumption 3. Atoms are part of the universe.
Conclusion 2. Atoms in our bodies are governed by the laws of the universe.
Assumption 4. Atoms are required to follow those laws. For atoms and molecules, there is no escape from the inexorable dictates of the laws of the universe. (One can't deny this if one accepts assumption #2 and #3)
Assumption 5. Our bodies and brains are made of atoms which follow the laws of the universe. (The materialist assumption)
Assumption 6. Our mind or set of mental states is an epiphenomenon of the arrangement of matter in our brain.
Explanation: Mental states arise from a collection of atoms organized in a particular pattern entailing our knowledge, experience and memories beliefs, all of which follow the laws of the universe because the underlying matter follows the universe. (Given that each of us have different memories and experiences which can only be encoded in the brain via different arrangements of matter, this seems easy to accept).
Conclusion 3. Beliefs are mental states and arise in the epiphenomenon of the matter in our brain from the particular arrangement of the atoms in the brain which follow the laws of the universe. Beliefs, memories, experience etc are entirely due to an arrangement of matter. (This follows from assumption 5 mental thoughts are the state of the epiphenomenon of matter).
Assumption 7: Actions arise from pre-existing mental states. One thinks of an apple before reaching out taking one and subsequently eating the juicy fruit.
Conclusion 4. The previous chain of logic shows therefore, that actions are based ultimately on the laws of the universe which admit of no contradiction or escape. A murder is nothing more than the actualization of the thoughts and intensions in the mind of the murderer which were caused by the particular arrangement of matter in his brain, which was caused by the laws of the universe. (follows from #7).
Conclusion 5. Actions have no escape from the inexorable demands of the laws of physics and the arrangement of matter which underlies the mental states. Therefore, actions have no free will. The mental state is caused by the arrangement of matter, and the action is caused by the mental state. The individual is forced to do, believe and experience what the patterns of atoms in his brain require, and those atoms, in turn, are required follow the laws of the universe.
This position is best summed up by Dawkins:
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/10/who_wrote_richard_dawkinss_new002783.html
Let's extend this reasoning a bit. If conclusions #4 and #5 are true, then it seems the following must also be true.
Conclusion 6-1. then the belief that we have or don't have free will is held, not because of evidence but because of the arrangement of the atoms in the brain.
Conclusion 6-2. The belief in the efficacy of logic is held, again, not because it is actually efficacious, but because of the arrangement of the atoms in the brain. We can't actually know if logic tells us anything true because it is an arrangement of atoms and molecules which force us to believe in the efficacy of logic.
Conclusion 6-3. Belief in atheism, theism or pantheism, scientific theories and love for family and everything we think we know, are held not because the person believes or loves, but because the arrangement of atoms require said beliefs or love. Evidence does not enter into the equation here.
Conclusion 6-4. Therefore, reality cannot be known because each and every belief is held because of the arrangement of atoms which require us to believe and 'know' what we know. We do not independently confirm scientific data or hold a single opinion that our molecules don't force us to hold. Evidence is meaningless.
Conclusion 6-5. Our memories don't represent actual events but are forced upon us by the atoms in our brain being arranged in a particular pattern which followed the laws of the universe. Our parents might not really have existed. The past scientific experiments we use as the building blocks of science might not have ever been carried out but merely be an arrangement of matter in our brain. Truth is a meaningless concept, since every belief and action is predetermined by the arrangement of our molecules.
Conclusion 6-6 Science is impossible; knowledge is impossible; history is impossible. Science, knowledge and history cannot possibly be proclaimed true because it is the arrangement of atoms in our minds that makes us hold that the facts of science, knowledge and history is true, not the data.
As Tony Rothman and George Sudarshan say:
Paradox 1: If science is impossible, as conclusion 6-6 requires, then assumption 2, the assumption that observational physical laws govern the universe, cannot be held to be true. Knowledge of those laws arise from science, but if science is believed only because of the arrangement of atoms in our brains, then there is no validity to the laws of science. And because of that this chain of logic fails because science must be true for this chain of logic to be true. But if this chain of logic is true, science is impossible.
But, if we change assumption 6 and say:
Assumption 6a Beliefs and judgments about data arise from analyses accomplished by an non-observable entity, i.e. a soul, which is not rooted in our observable universe, and thus not constrained by the inexorable demands of the physical universe. This entity may be rooted in dark matter or some other substrate which is unobservable. That entity is free to consider all the information, and choose the appropriate position. The information is then transferred to the observable world and the atoms put into appropriate patterns for those beliefs.
Conclusion 3a. Beliefs held by the individual, are not caused by the arrangement of matter in their brain but are the result of actions and beliefs accomplished by another entity based in some other substrate, i. e. dark matter, immaterial soul etc. The particular arrangement of matter in the brain is logically later than the decision-making event.
Assumption 7a. Actions are the result of decisions made in the unobservable substrate which is free of the laws of the universe. As an aside, Libet's experiment which purports to show that consciousness is not involved in decision making and thus claims that we have no free will, might be explained within the framework presented here. The unconscious mind IS the unobservable entity in action. It makes the decision and transfers knowledge to our bodies.
Conclusion 6-1a. If this is true, then the belief that we have or don't have free will is held because of Logic and evidence, and because of decisions made by the unobservable entity which then encodes an appropriate arrangement of matter in our brains. Libet's electrical potential comes into play here. The encoding of our brains is a result of the decisions by the unobservable entity, NOT because the atoms in our brains constrain us. It is the freedom of the unobservable entity based within dark matter or classical soul, which allows us to truly be free.
Conclusion 6-2a. Belief in the efficacy of logic is held because logic works, not because we are forced into a belief that logic works by the arrangement of our atoms.
Conclusion 6-3. Belief in atheism, theism or pantheism, scientific theories and love for family and everything we think we know, are held because an entity free of the inexorable demands of this universe's laws allows a free decision on what it chooses to believe. The person believes or loves, based on the evidence he has at hand. Evidence and data are extremely important.
Conclusion 6-4. Therefore, reality can be known because each and every belief is held because of the free consideration of evidence which is weighed by use of logic and math which actually works and is not forced on us by the arrangement of matter in our brain We can and do independently confirm scientific data or hold opinions that are well considered.
Conclusion 6-5. Our memories do represent actual events because we are free from the forced mental states the materialist position requires. Our parents did exist. Past scientific experiments we use as the building blocks of science were carried out. Truth is, if not absolutely obtainable, at least assymptotically obtainable.
Conclusion 6-6 Science is possible; knowledge is possible; history is possible. Science, knowledge and history can be proclaimed true because data is actually examined, and an efficacious logical chain is applied to the problems at hand.
Conclusion 7. Scientific and historical knowledge can be real if and only if there is an entity free of the laws of the universe which can examine the data and make a free unhindered, unconstrained decision.. The materialist position is self-defeating. Our choice seems to be between having no basis upon which to believe anything is true or having a soul.
Comment