Compatibalism

[Jedidiah]

So rather than using any rational method to chose you go with what you want to be true.

[Tassman]

So rather than using any rational method to chose you go with what you want to be true.

There is no "rational method" for obtaining evidence of gods, only revelation...as alleged. As for going "with what you want to be true" that's more the province of theism than atheism.

[Jude]

The above bolded is problematic and almost sound robotic as to what is determined and what is not in different circumstances as to what people believe or not believe. This sounds like a religious testimonial more than an objective of what is the nature of Free Will. Yes, free will/determinism problem runs deeper then ones own personal experience, and putting ones faith in one religion or another should noot determine the nature of free/will for all of human nature.

I put my faith in science for understanding the nature of the physical world, including human nature, and not the existence nor the nature of God and the soul.

I understand.
My point is that regardless of the level of academia involved in the discussion there is a point where objectivity must give way to faith. I certainly don't oppose but rather highly encourage and enjoy reading continued scientific thought and study regarding all consciousness issues. In the meantime one must weigh current data and try to stay abreast of what is objectively known and what is subjectively theorized. That's why I come here and a few other places as much as I am able. When we die there will still be a sack full of big questions left unanswered. And so it is that one must of necessity put their faith in one worldview or another. Yourself included. If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice. ( l love that song. Free Will)
But I know that this thread is more about the nuts and bolts than theological implications so this is my last post here. Peace.

[seer]

What needs to be settled is your claim that libertarian free-will exists in isolation from your subconscious influences. Because, if you acknowledge that subconscious processes have an effect upon your choices, you are admitting that "free-will" is impacted, at least to a degree, by antecedent forces. Thus, you are not exercising libertarian free-will.

I will try again: is everything we do, think or say determined - yes or no?

[Jedidiah]

There is no "rational method" for obtaining evidence of gods, only revelation...as alleged. As for going "with what you want to be true" that's more the province of theism than atheism.

face palm for sure.jpg

[shunyadragon]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]20439[/ATTACH]

You gotta do better than this.

[Jedidiah]

You gotta do better than this.

Not with Tass. He is not able to see the inconsistency of his posts.

[Tassman]

Not with Tass. He is not able to see the inconsistency of his posts.

The "inconsistency" is yours. Studying religion and searching for evidence of God is a useless endeavour. It's all based on the assumption that God exists. Since we have no evidence for that, the rest is commentary on a nonexistent being and its alleged "revelation". You may as well build a scientific endeavour around the existence of Santa Claus.

You gotta do better than this.

It's all he's got.

[Boxing Pythagoras]

The "inconsistency" is yours. Studying religion and searching for evidence of God is a useless endeavour. It's all based on the assumption that God exists. Since we have no evidence for that, the rest is commentary on a nonexistent being and its alleged "revelation". You may as well build a scientific endeavour around the existence of Santa Claus.

Look, dude, I'm a fairly outspoken atheist, but if you don't see the inconsistency in your own post, here, you should probably brush up on some basic Logic.

Immediately after chiding theists for assuming that God exists, you assume that God does not exist. You can't rebuke people for baseless assumptions while making baseless assumptions and expect to be taken seriously.

[Jedidiah]

The "inconsistency" is yours. Studying religion and searching for evidence of God is a useless endeavour. It's all based on the assumption that God exists. Since we have no evidence for that, the rest is commentary on a nonexistent being and its alleged "revelation". You may as well build a scientific endeavour around the existence of Santa Claus.

You are the one making an assumption. Seeking and answer to the question, "Is there a God?" is not an assumption, it is a search for evidence (even if it is not scientific evidence).

[Tassman]

I will try again: is everything we do, think or say determined - yes or no?

[shunyadragon]

Not with Tass. He is not able to see the inconsistency of his posts.

Actually his posts are very consistent with his beliefs and you with yours, but unfortunately there is wall

[Tassman]

Look, dude, I'm a fairly outspoken atheist, but if you don't see the inconsistency in your own post, here, you should probably brush up on some basic Logic.

Immediately after chiding theists for assuming that God exists, you assume that God does not exist. You can't rebuke people for baseless assumptions while making baseless assumptions and expect to be taken seriously.

[seer]

So is that a yes or no? Is everything we do, think or say determined?

[Jedidiah]

This is really just the same statement. It is still not based on reality. In fact studying religion is based upon the fact that religions exist and one might have an interest in examining what they teach. Searching for evidence of of God is based upon the fact that one might be interested in actually trying to determine the validity of the possibility. If one already believes in God one might be motivated to point others to the things they have learned.