Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 67 (9049 total)
33 online now:
CosmicChimp, kjsimons, nwr, ringo (4 members, 29 visitors)
Newest Member: Wes johnson
Upcoming Birthdays: Astrophile
Post Volume: Total: 887,597 Year: 5,243/14,102 Month: 164/677 Week: 23/26 Day: 5/6 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Biology is Destiny?
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10332
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 34 of 129 (641810)
11-22-2011 1:47 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by New Cat's Eye
11-22-2011 11:16 AM


Re: Neurology kills Free Will
CS writes:

Yeah, but I don't have any reason to think the CIA's involved...

Well what would constitute a valid reason for thinking that the CIA were using undetectable thought rays? What do you think constitutes a valid reason for the believing that a disembodied spirit is responsible?

CS writes:

I've always thought of it as an underlying nudger rather than an all out controller. The mind controls the body and its actions, the spirit influences the mind, but so does the brain (because the mind stems from the brain). And I suppose the spirit can be affected as well... from the phyical world, to the body/brain, then through the mind on to the spirit.

You seem to be claiming the 'mind' as some sort of intermediary between the physical and the immaterial spirit. I am intrigued by this idea and how you see it working.

Given the example in the OP what do you think happens to the spirit as a result of the physical tumour? Anything at all? Is this spirit self a version of 'you' that is free from all physical effects? Or just some? Is it a version of you that is free from behaviour affecting hormones (e.g. testosterone)? Free from disease (e.g. alzheimers)? Free from the effects of ageing? Free from the effects of all physical experience?

Is this spirit version of 'you' something that exists unchanged your entire life? If it does change then what things cause it to change and what things don't? How do you decide?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-22-2011 11:16 AM New Cat's Eye has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-22-2011 2:31 PM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10332
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 36 of 129 (641812)
11-22-2011 2:19 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by New Cat's Eye
11-22-2011 9:42 AM


Re: Neurology kills Free Will
CS writes:

Whether or not dualism can work, is beside the point that its can act as a band-aid for the problem, no?

In a very practical sense I think you are right.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-22-2011 9:42 AM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10332
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 43 of 129 (641831)
11-22-2011 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by New Cat's Eye
11-22-2011 2:31 PM


Re: Neurology kills Free Will
So basically you do think that the physical has an effect on this spirit self but there isn't really any rhyme or reason as to which physical things do and which things don't.

It's just sorta intuitive and you know it when you see it?

"It" being the physical things that affect the spirit in some way.

CS writes:

You changed it from invisible to undetectable.... how would the CIA even know if they were using undetectable rays?

"Have you fired the undetectable rays?" "I dunno, sir, but I'm not detecting them."

I am delighted to hear of your recent convesrion to skeptically considering undetectables.

Now - Tell me just how can this spirit-self you are advocating be detected as distinct from brain activity?

CS writes:

Well fuck, I don't know. I supose I could speculate for you, but I'm just making this shit up:

Agreement at last....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-22-2011 2:31 PM New Cat's Eye has not yet responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10332
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 84 of 129 (642297)
11-27-2011 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Chuck77
11-26-2011 11:45 PM


Re: Biology does not dismiss free will
Chuck writes:

Maybe this subject should be in the religious section because what you are arguing certainly isn't biology. What you are arguing is that you have no idea what free will is and are trying to find a physical attribute that refutes a non physical thing.

What is this 'non physical thing' you speak of?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Chuck77, posted 11-26-2011 11:45 PM Chuck77 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Chuck77, posted 11-28-2011 12:11 AM Straggler has responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10332
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 93 of 129 (642382)
11-28-2011 5:48 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by Chuck77
11-28-2011 12:11 AM


Re: Biology does not dismiss free will
Straggler writes:

What is this 'non physical thing' you speak of?

Chuck writes:

Free will.

Are you suggesting that it is possible to have freewill without a physical brain?

If we removed your brain would you still have freewill?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Chuck77, posted 11-28-2011 12:11 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10332
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 126 of 129 (642851)
12-02-2011 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by Tangle
12-02-2011 7:55 AM


Them and Us
A lot of this comes down to 'them and us'. Dehumanisation is a common psychological method of making horrific acts more morally acceptable to those who commit them.

So you can argue (as I think you are doing) that we have an innate evolved sense of morality whilst also accepting that we don't always apply it consistently.

We apply morality to 'us' and are much more flexible about applying morality to 'them'. But how exactly we determine who constitutes 'us' and 'them' in any given situation s far from simple and has it's roots in other evolved aspects of behaviour.

Or something like that....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Tangle, posted 12-02-2011 7:55 AM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by Tangle, posted 12-04-2011 6:58 AM Straggler has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021