(February 14, 2017 at 2:31 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:(February 14, 2017 at 2:19 pm)SteveII Wrote: You say there is no evidence for Free Will. Isn't your conclusion that there is no Free Will based on naturalism--a philosophical position, and not based on science or other concrete 'evidence'? Why should I believe your ideology that there is nothing but natural properties and causes when I have very good reason to suspect there is more than that? In case you are going to ask what are my reasons, I would reply that Naturalism does not address why:
a. God is the best explanation why anything at all exists.
b. God is the best explanation of the origin of the universe.
c. God is the best explanation of the fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life.
d. God is the best explanation of intentional states of consciousness.
e. God is the best explanation of objective moral values and duties.
Nice poisoning of the well. I've come to expect nothing less from you.
And 'explanation'? You mean other way of saying, "I don't know," while slipping in my favorite book character, Yahweh, right?
Is there something wrong with my reasoning that the conclusion that there is no Free Will is not based on 'evidence' but based on a worldview (metaphysical naturalism)? Further, I think that worldview to be lacking in explanatory powers and therefore inadequate to be used as a reason to deny the conclusion that Free Will exists.
