RE: The burden of proof relating to conciousness, free choice and rationality
March 7, 2012 at 10:56 pm
(This post was last modified: March 7, 2012 at 11:30 pm by marx_2012.)
Discussing the denial of free will is the equivalent to discussing the denial of the colour red. While we all experience the colour red on a day to day basis and while we all can have communication of those experiences between each other, we have no evidence of it. There is absolutely no evidence for the experience of the colour red. You say that you can see the colour, but how can I know that you see it? The same can be extended to all human experience. You say you can feel pain, you are showing all the external signs of pain but how can I know that you are experiencing it? You say that you have the perception of this computer screen, you are showing all the signs of seeing it by your posts, but there is absolutely no evidence that you are experiencing that perception.
This discussion includes the nature of free will in the current ideologies, yet it also includes conciousness. While we are focusing on free will there is also the question of subjective experience, concious perception. Where is the evidence for subjective experience? How can it exist in a purely objective nature of the universe? Without this explanation there can be no meaning to any statements such as 'your', 'I'm', 'you', even 'us', 'our' and 'we'. 'We' cannot post 'our' opinions of 'your' selves without a definition of subjective experience. Have you ever lived a day without having subjective experience? Free will doesnt exist because 'we' have no evidence, it is just 'our' nature and 'your' perspective of free will is mearly 'your' opinion. 'You' cannot explain free will and 'I'm' mearly a construct of the nature of laws that govern 'me'.
Do you see irrationality of 'your' reason?
Deny your own subjective experiance and explain the alternative.
This is why I state that it is a burden of proof!
Rythm before you post your 'non sequitur' post I urge to read what Iv said first and try this time to explain your own position.
This discussion includes the nature of free will in the current ideologies, yet it also includes conciousness. While we are focusing on free will there is also the question of subjective experience, concious perception. Where is the evidence for subjective experience? How can it exist in a purely objective nature of the universe? Without this explanation there can be no meaning to any statements such as 'your', 'I'm', 'you', even 'us', 'our' and 'we'. 'We' cannot post 'our' opinions of 'your' selves without a definition of subjective experience. Have you ever lived a day without having subjective experience? Free will doesnt exist because 'we' have no evidence, it is just 'our' nature and 'your' perspective of free will is mearly 'your' opinion. 'You' cannot explain free will and 'I'm' mearly a construct of the nature of laws that govern 'me'.
Do you see irrationality of 'your' reason?
Deny your own subjective experiance and explain the alternative.
This is why I state that it is a burden of proof!
Rythm before you post your 'non sequitur' post I urge to read what Iv said first and try this time to explain your own position.
