Do you believe in free will?

[genkaus]

Perhaps we've misunderstood each other here. I think that the conscience itself is the non-material subject in question. It interacts with the material brain to create the 'conscious mind' which gives us free will. Through what mechanism does it interact with the material brain to create the conscious mind, i'm not sure, but that doesn't mean that it can't interact. My only premises would be that the non-material is unaffected by the determinism of the material world, and the non-material is ontologically dependent on the material in which it is harbored.

As for the law of identity, I'm not sure what issue you have with my presentation of the non-material here. The conscience has a separate identity than the brain, and they come together to create the conscious mind. To use your example again, cause and effect have separate identities, yet combine under the identity of causation.

I've ignored it so far, but conscience means "awareness of a moral or ethical aspect to one's conduct together". Consciousness means "A sense or awareness of one's personal or collective identity, including the attitudes, beliefs". Since the subject of discussion is not morality, I'm assuming that your intended term was the latter all along. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Now, my primary issue here is absence of any standards set-up to determine what you mean by non-material. As I said before, conceptual fields such as logic and math are non-material as well as supposed entities such as souls, spirits, angels etc. These areas are qualitatively different and unless you specify what kind of non-material you are referring to and the resulting confusion contributes to error with regards to the subject.

Now, if metaphysically your premise had been the former - that consciousness is a conceptual abstract - then my argument would be that it is not free from material determinism. If its the latter, I'd simply say - baloney.

Possible scenario for the existence of free will via the non-material conscience:
1. There are non-material subjects which exist
2. Conscience is a non-material subject
3. The non-material can interact with the material (while remaining outside of the determinism of the non-material)
4. If there is interaction between the conscience and the brain, then free will exists
5. There is interaction between the conscience and the brain
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
4. Free will exists

Depending upon the qualities you assign to the non-material, your error would be in 3. (abstractions cannot remain outside material determinism) or in 1. (No, they don't).

I apologize, could you provide which page on the thread you stated your opinion?

I jumped into it on page 15.

I'm failing to see the issue you are proposing with the identity of the non-material subject, and I cannot explain to you how the interaction occurs between non-material and material (because I don't know), simply that it could (does) happen.

Firstly, you should be able to see the basic problem here - asserting something without even a hint at justification.

Now, if you are talking about consciousness as an abstract non-material entity, then it'd be a reflection of the material world and therefore any so-called interaction would be bound by material determinism. But there I'd have no argument against its identity.

If you are talking about it as a spiritual non-material entity, then the problem would be much different. The non-material consciousness would need a mechanism to receive the input getting to the brain (because consciousness always needs to be "conscious of" something), otherwise it wouldn't exist. It needs to do it in such a way that the chain of causality governing that material reception does not affect it as well. Without these explanations, the identity of your non-material consciousness would be incomplete.