who is in control? (how queer!)

Originally posted by twhitehead
Referring to the supernatural does not solve anything at all. It merely states that we are not entirely part of the universe. However it in no way solves the issues you are having problems with. I think the real problem is your desire not to be entirely natural. Some sort of phobia.

Referring to the supernatural does not solve anything at all. It merely states that we are not entirely part of the universe. However it in no way solves the issues you are having problems with. I think the real problem is your desire not to be entirely natural. Some sort of phobia.WHITEY

Not at all my dear friend. You need to understand the problem. If I am to have free will then I need to have something in me that is free from determinism and inevitable causality. The natural world around us does not offer that too me. I have no power to do anything other than what my make up (given to me by nature) determines me to do. You may argue that there is randomness , but all that gives me is pot luck choices not reasoned choices. So where can I find such an ability? Do I just have to accept that free will is an illusion?

Originally posted by knightmeister
Not at all my dear friend. You need to understand the problem. If I am to have free will then I need to have something in me that is free from determinism and inevitable causality. The natural world around us does not offer that too me. I have no power to do anything other than what my make up (given to me by nature) determines me to do.

And your supernatural makeup is different? It is either deterministic or not. There is no third choice.

You may argue that there is randomness , but all that gives me is pot luck choices not reasoned choices. So where can I find such an ability?
But reasoned choices are clearly caused (by the reason) and thus not the 'free will' you are looking for. You want pot luck choice but just cant seem to admit it.

Do I just have to accept that free will is an illusion?
Your concept of free will seems to be not just illusion but illogical. You basically want something that is not reasoned, not random, not caused by an outside influence not caused by and internal influence, in fact uncaused. But you insist that this uncaused choice of yours nevertheless is not random? And you accept full responsibility for any of these choices you make even though you did not actually make them yourself as they were uncaused. Methinks it is your ability to reason that is the true illusion and not your ability to choose.

Originally posted by twhitehead
And your supernatural makeup is different? It is either deterministic or not. There is no third choice.

[b]You may argue that there is randomness , but all that gives me is pot luck choices not reasoned choices. So where can I find such an ability?
But reasoned choices are clearly caused (by the reason) and thus not the 'free will' you are lookin ...[text shortened]... ethinks it is your ability to reason that is the true illusion and not your ability to choose.[/b]

And your supernatural makeup is different? It is either deterministic or not. There is no third choice. WHITEY

Simply saying there is no third choice does not make it so. Sounds like you do at least agree that in order for us to make reasonable free choices we need something more than randomness or determinism ?

Originally posted by knightmeister
Simply saying there is no third choice does not make it so.

Something either fits a description or it doesn't there is no third choice. And no, its not because I say so its just a fact of life (supernatural or otherwise).

Sounds like you do at least agree that in order for us to make reasonable free choices we need something more than randomness or determinism ?
No I don't agree. I have no problem with calling my choices free choices even though I believe that they are largely deterministic with a random component. At least I find that far more logical and satisfying than your idea that God makes all your decisions for you in some magical manner.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Something either fits a description or it doesn't there is no third choice. And no, its not because I say so its just a fact of life (supernatural or otherwise).

[b]Sounds like you do at least agree that in order for us to make reasonable free choices we need something more than randomness or determinism ?
No I don't agree. I have no problem with ...[text shortened]... nd satisfying than your idea that God makes all your decisions for you in some magical manner.[/b]

Something either fits a description or it doesn't there is no third choice. And no, its not because I say so its just a fact of life (supernatural or otherwise). WHITEY

But this is still just a statement , have you no argument to back it up? You are basically saying that it is impossible for an uncaused supreme entity that is not random in nature to exist. Fine. I can't prove that it does. You can't prove that it doesn't. What I am trying to show is that if such an entity existed it would at least have the capacity to give us free choices and not random choices.

What's also interesting is that you say there is no thrid choice which is a kind of reversal of our debate on S from N. You didn't have any problem with having a third choice then.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Something either fits a description or it doesn't there is no third choice. And no, its not because I say so its just a fact of life (supernatural or otherwise).

[b]Sounds like you do at least agree that in order for us to make reasonable free choices we need something more than randomness or determinism ?
No I don't agree. I have no problem with ...[text shortened]... nd satisfying than your idea that God makes all your decisions for you in some magical manner.[/b]

Sounds like you do at least agree that in order for us to make reasonable free choices we need something more than randomness or determinism ? KM

No I don't agree. I have no problem with calling my choices free choices even though I believe that they are largely deterministic with a random component.WHITEY

So our choices are determined sometimes but at other times they are random? You must therefore find it quite difficult to hold someone responsible for their actions then. A good defence might be " look don't blame me , I had no choice , my actions were determined" , if that failed then " look Ok my actions weren't determined but I shot him by pure chance officer , it's not my fault , it's the great cosmic dice that made it happen"

" At least I find that far more logical and satisfying than your idea that God makes all your decisions for you in some magical manner."WHITEY

This is a bit beneath you isn't it? Resorting to gross misrepresentation?? I did not say this . I said that God gives us the capacity to be free of determinism and make reasonable (and real) choices of our own volition. This is not him "doing it for us". If you want I will explain a bit about how it works....

Originally posted by twhitehead
And your supernatural makeup is different? It is either deterministic or not. There is no third choice.

[b]You may argue that there is randomness , but all that gives me is pot luck choices not reasoned choices. So where can I find such an ability?
But reasoned choices are clearly caused (by the reason) and thus not the 'free will' you are lookin ...[text shortened]... ethinks it is your ability to reason that is the true illusion and not your ability to choose.[/b]

You may argue that there is randomness , but all that gives me is pot luck choices not reasoned choices. So where can I find such an ability?KM
But reasoned choices are clearly caused (by the reason) and thus not the 'free will' you are looking for. You want pot luck choice but just cant seem to admit it.WHITEY

No , wrong once again. A reasoned choice can be a choice that has been made for a reason but that reason is not sufficient to cause the choice. The choice is made independent of the reason in that there is nothing in the reason that FORCES the choice. the choice is therefore free and not a forced choice but the choice has a justification or rationale nevertheless. I can say I chose A (and all the rationale that goes with A) but A need not have caused me to choose. I just chose.

Originally posted by knightmeister
You are basically saying that it is impossible for an uncaused supreme entity that is not random in nature to exist.

I am saying that it is impossible for an entity that is neither caused nor not-caused to exist. Do you disagree? Surely uncaused means not caused?
Now, I have a word for not-caused and it is spelt like this "random".

What's also interesting is that you say there is no third choice which is a kind of reversal of our debate on S from N. You didn't have any problem with having a third choice then.
What I showed in that debate was that you were falsely claiming that you had two options which were compliments of each other. If you can show that caused and not-caused are not compliments then I will accept a third option. Please proceed to do so.

Originally posted by knightmeister
No , wrong once again. A reasoned choice can be a choice that has been made for a reason but that reason is not sufficient to cause the choice. The choice is made independent of the reason in that there is nothing in the reason that FORCES the choice. the choice is therefore free and not a forced choice but the choice has a justification or rationale n ...[text shortened]... (and all the rationale that goes with A) but A need not have caused me to choose. I just chose.

A perfect description of random if ever there was one.

Originally posted by twhitehead
A perfect description of random if ever there was one.

How so? The choices God is most interested in are the moral ones concerning obeying his will or not . If I am caught between choice A and B then I have moral/ spiritual awareness of the choice before me. I am not in some ammoral random vacuum. I have awareness and a sense of morality and reason. There exists a tension between the ways of the self and the ways of God. The reasoning behind (or moral compunction) choice A or B is still there it's just that the reason is not sufficient to force the choice , I have to will the choice.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I am saying that it is impossible for an entity that is neither caused nor not-caused to exist. Do you disagree? Surely uncaused means not caused?
Now, I have a word for not-caused and it is spelt like this "random".

[b]What's also interesting is that you say there is no third choice which is a kind of reversal of our debate on S from N. You didn't ha ...[text shortened]... d not-caused are not compliments then I will accept a third option. Please proceed to do so.

I am saying that it is impossible for an entity that is neither caused nor not-caused to exist. Do you disagree? Surely uncaused means not caused?
Now, I have a word for not-caused and it is spelt like this "random". WHITEY

But what you are missing is that God is not an event. I agree an Uncaused event would have to be random by definition. But God is not an event in that he is eternal and the ground of all reality. This is what makes him uncaused . He is uncaused because there is no need for any cause not because he is random. He has always existed. An entity that has no beginning has no need of any cause.

If God somehow "came into" existence for no cause then he would be random. But he didn't . There is no "coming into" existence . He
's always existed. If you stop thinking of him as an event it might be easier to realise how he might not be random.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I am saying that it is impossible for an entity that is neither caused nor not-caused to exist. Do you disagree? Surely uncaused means not caused?
Now, I have a word for not-caused and it is spelt like this "random".

[b]What's also interesting is that you say there is no third choice which is a kind of reversal of our debate on S from N. You didn't ha ...[text shortened]... d not-caused are not compliments then I will accept a third option. Please proceed to do so.

If you can show that caused and not-caused are not compliments then I will accept a third option. Please proceed to do so.WHITEY

There is no third option if God is an event , but he is not an event nor an effect. He is radically different from that.

Queers and control? Are you a gay submissive?

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Queers and control? Are you a gay submissive?

I never thought of it like that. The idea came from your subconscious not mine. Are you?