Why would a perfect being make an imperfect world?

[SteveII]

Determinism is a doctrine that stems from a metaphysical naturalism worldview--there only exists material properties and causes. This is most definitely a philosophical position.

Your question: "Show me evidence of a choice made that was not affected by prior causes, ever, in all of human history." does nothing to undermine the argument of Free Will. Of course every choice is informed by our past...and our present.  The question remains do we have a choice to act. 

I think the best evidence is the mind/brain relationship. What evidence does neuroscience provide that the mind is identical to our brain, and therefore material? 

Not everything that goes on in our mind is causally determined by our bodies. Sometime what goes on in our bodies is a result of what goes on in our mind. I am choosing to reply to you and do the necessary chores of getting sentences down on the screen. We have mental-to-physical causation. The explanation of both the choice I made and the physical events going on in my body is for the purpose of defending my position. A purposeful explanation is a teleological explanation and a teleological explanation is not a deterministic one. 

Secondly, electrodes can be used to stimulate the brain to do different things (make a noise, raise a hand, etc.). However the patient always says something like "I didn't do that, you did that". There is no place that can be stimulated to cause a patient to decide to do something. 

Lastly, while there is a causal dependency of the mind events on the brain events, you cannot confuse correlation with identity. It does not follow that if two events are correlated, that they are identical.

Everything that goes on in your mind may not be caused by the body, but it caused by something.  You think you are "choosing" to reply to me, but it is just output based on input.
Everthying we have observed is caused (or perhaps random), but in the macro world, caused.  You don't get to insert magic if you cannot find the exact cause.  This is just God of the Gaps inserted into the free-will argument.

You have demonstrating nothing but weak arguments based on presuppositions that are themselves unproven (Duality of Mind is BS, and presupposed the supernatural to explain the mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dualism_(p...y_of_mind)) for free-will, no evidence, and not even strong logical arguments.  Show me evidence for the supernatural, now.  Every statement you make is just based on one more unsupported claim.

No, I gave three points that certainly were not "god of the gaps" arguments or "unsupported claims". Body/Mind Dualism does not presuppose the supernatural--it is evidence of the supernatural AND evidence of Free Will. 

Intentionality is the property of being about something or of something. Our thoughts are directed at objects. For example, I can think about my dog, I can think about my sailboat. No physical object has intentionality in this sense. A rock or a coffee cup is not about or of something. Only mental states or states of consciousness are about other things. On your view, there are no mental states so you are really not thinking about something--you are just reacting to stimulus. 

So, it seems your worldview causes you to ignore the arguments because it would become unraveled if you did consider the possibility. Who here is ignoring evidence?

---

So you admit that the Bible teaches that we have free will to "choose or reject God." So then regarding all 10 commandments and the 1000 other rules in the OT, that would just be more "choosing God?" The prophets and psalmist that lament the choices that people have made was more "choosing God?" The proverbs that tell you the best way to live, were more "choosing God?" Paul's teaching on the fruits of the spirit and chapter after chapter of Christian living were just more "choosing god?". So, you simply defined everything in the Bible as "choosing God" and then exempted it from the "overall free will theme". You don't seem to have a firm grasp on the issue. 

Are you really distinguishing between "Christ" and "God" as an argument that we are making things up? Ugh.

Now you're just being a dick.  I would like to have a serious conversation like an adult.  What are you, fucking twelve?  "So you ADMIT that I'm right and you're wrong because you used a word that I used proving that I'm right and you're wrong!"  Grow the fuck up and you'll get a serious response, putz.

I apologize. However, your claim (in your previous post) that we can "...choose or reject God, but again, that is a single choice, not an overall "free will" theme." just makes no sense. To say that the Bible, which is literally filled with instruction on how to live, teaches we only have one choice, is simply to not understand what free will is or not to understand at all what the Bible is. 

---

---

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.

Not sure about B and C, but the rest are clearly the case.

Neat little video on B: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CulBuMC...dex=1&t=7s

Another one on C:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE76nwim...aRoX&t=26s