The burden of proof relating to conciousness, free choice and rationality

[Angrboda]

@Whateverist
For what it's worth, John Searle is on my short list of the world's most annoying windbags. 'Nuff said.

@Marx
Here's the thing. We have plenty of evidence establishing the regularity of the laws of nature. We have, at best, speculative notions which postulate the existence of something called free will. Science has met its burden of proof regarding the regularity of the laws of nature. It's time that free will theorists, like you, met yours. In this very thread you've racked up a laundry list of things that you feel free will is a pre-condition for, including rationality and subjectivity; so far your support of these claims has been little more than ipse dixit. It's time for you to step up to the plate and start swinging. So far you've hit nothing but air.

(And yes, I realize it's fashionable in some circles to attempt to reverse the burden of proof in an attempt to evade your own responsibilities, but really, you're not fooling anyone.)

---

ETA: My computer chooses which sectors on the hard disk to put which parts of my document on; it does not have free will. All that "choice" requires is degrees of freedom and an algorithm for eliminating those degrees of freedom.