(May 16, 2025 at 1:45 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: You never studied Psychology

Or he did, and just doesn't understand it very well. 

Like someone constantly quoting Aristotle, while using known common logical fallacies. 

It's kind of cute when they try though. 

Lets not forget, we're talking about someone who has claimed to believe the earth is a few thousand years old, and becomes very reticent when you ask about miracles.

There is depth, and nuanced thinking, and then there is bullshit and word salad.

The tricky bit about the free will debate is that the universe would look exactly the same whether or not free will exists. Let’s say you had eggs for breakfast. How could you possibly know if that was a free choice or if it was a necessary consequence of the universe unraveling in a particular way?

It’s an interesting debate, but not an especially productive one.

Boru

(May 16, 2025 at 3:34 pm)Alan V Wrote: So are you a psychologist or a Christian, or are you trying to be both without success?

You didn't know the free will debate existed in Christianity for longer than psychology and neuroscience has been around?

Sure has, and all of it bat shit crazy. Just a bunch of nuts trying to propagandize each others flock knowing nothing whatsoever about the subject they purport to report.

(May 16, 2025 at 4:19 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: The tricky bit about the free will debate is that the universe would look exactly the same whether or not free will exists. Let’s say you had eggs for breakfast. How could you possibly know if that was a free choice or if it was a necessary consequence of the universe unraveling in a particular way?

Then why do we have a concept of free will? What function does that serve in a deterministic universe? Fodder for endless and pointless debate? Why not a pervading sense of "I'm an automaton and proud of it!"?

(May 16, 2025 at 4:31 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 16, 2025 at 3:34 pm)Alan V Wrote: So are you a psychologist or a Christian, or are you trying to be both without success?

You didn't know the free will debate existed in Christianity for longer than psychology and neuroscience has been around?

Along with the debate on whether or not we're misgendering demons? Perhaps you shouldn't list two thousand years of failure amongst your successes.

(May 16, 2025 at 5:15 pm)Paleophyte Wrote:

(May 16, 2025 at 4:19 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: The tricky bit about the free will debate is that the universe would look exactly the same whether or not free will exists. Let’s say you had eggs for breakfast. How could you possibly know if that was a free choice or if it was a necessary consequence of the universe unraveling in a particular way?

Then why do we have a concept of free will? What function does that serve in a deterministic universe? Fodder for endless and pointless debate? Why not a pervading sense of "I'm an automaton and proud of it!"?

Well, I think the point is that, at least hypothetically, that may be exactly what we're doing..we just don't know that how we perceive things is how bioautomata would.  So, conceptually, you could ask those questions (or any other) and their response - yes, that's something bioautomata does.  Why do we have pervading senses?  For model based control.

(May 16, 2025 at 4:31 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 16, 2025 at 3:34 pm)Alan V Wrote: So are you a psychologist or a Christian, or are you trying to be both without success?

You didn't know the free will debate existed in Christianity for longer than psychology and neuroscience has been around?

You are right, I just forgot.  These days we don't see so many Calvinists. 

Of course, also these days we don't discuss determinism as a matter of preserving the all-powerful nature of God.

Nice dodge though.  

(May 16, 2025 at 3:56 pm)Sheldon Wrote:

(May 16, 2025 at 1:45 pm)Nay_Sayer Wrote: You never studied Psychology

Or he did, and just doesn't understand it very well. 

Like someone constantly quoting Aristotle, while using known common logical fallacies. 

It's kind of cute when they try though. 

Lets not forget, we're talking about someone who has claimed to believe the earth is a few thousand years old, and becomes very reticent when you ask about miracles.

There is depth, and nuanced thinking, and then there is bullshit and word salad.

In this forum, John is largely playing the role of Christian apologist.

However, I do enjoy (and much prefer) him talking more about psychology.  I think of most of Christianity as being uninformed about psychology, so I am still looking forward to how he tries to reconcile them.

(May 16, 2025 at 4:19 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: The tricky bit about the free will debate is that the universe would look exactly the same whether or not free will exists. Let’s say you had eggs for breakfast. How could you possibly know if that was a free choice or if it was a necessary consequence of the universe unraveling in a particular way?

I think the absence of free will heavily implies complete capture by external stimuli. I would expect to see nothing but cascades of reflexive behavior from top to bottom. And what's telling here is that we do have such systems in limited quantities. In a typical reflex arc, if you grab a hot plate the sensory signal travels to the spinal cord and bounces back as a motor signal prompting your hand to let go. The behavior is mostly on a closed circuit, and there's no reason why all behaviors can't be on train tracks like this, with nothing but inputs and outputs as the behaviorists used to theorize. However, I said mostly because even in such reflexive loops, there is still veto power coming from another source: the brain. You can voluntarily inhibit the reflex circuit for whatever reason, like not wanting to drop and break the plate. And if you've ever been in that situation, you can feel the push and pull between your volition and the impulse to let go.

As I mentioned much earlier, autonomy is one of our most fundamental motivational needs. If you want to predict how intrinsically motivated a person will be at doing anything, measuring how much autonomy is involved is a great predictor. In other words, the brain wants to be in control and avoid external capture. Conversations like this just don't make sense without free will. You don’t build a system obsessed with agency and self-regulation if all behavior is passive output.

But of course, the problem with those who oppose free will is that they just handwave things like this as illusions.