(April 18, 2012 at 4:59 pm)Perhaps Wrote: You missed my first premise.
1. The mind (which gives 'me' the ability to have identity) exists in the true material world
2. The mind creates reality
3. I (the mind) exist in the reality which I create
4. Thus, because I have created it, I have free will in my reality
Your first premise here is in conflict with your second. And your second is in conflict with your third. And your first is in conflict with your third.
The material world is real. It is a part of reality. Your mind cannot create something in which it already exists.
If your mind exists in the reality which it creates, then it cannot exist before it creates it.
Your mind cannot have dual existences, one in material reality and one in whatever it creates.
Get a grip, man. You are losing it.
(April 18, 2012 at 4:59 pm)Perhaps Wrote: This would be analogous to an individual who is blind. They exist in the 'material world', yet their perception creates blackness all around them. They live within this blackness.
No, actually, they do not live within the blackness. They live in the material world. Don't take poetic expressions so literally. That "blackness", which is simply the absence of visual perception, is not reality. It is merely their perception of reality. You do realize that reality is defined as something that is independent of perception right?
(April 18, 2012 at 4:59 pm)Perhaps Wrote: The real question to ask here, past the validity of free will, would be what's the fucking point? Even if I do possess free will, it doesn't change the fact that nothing matters and that their is no point. It just means that I'm responsible for what I do, but responsible to what or who? If its morally related to the other minds then there still remains no point, because when I cease to exist I won't be able to even care. Ultimately we are worthless and without purpose - that's what erks me most about my existence.
You have some really fucked up ideas about the nature of your existence. Get those straight before you take on the question of free-will. Right now, almost all of your arguments are nonsensical.
(April 18, 2012 at 4:59 pm)Perhaps Wrote: You use logic (which is created by the mind) to attempt to disprove my supposition that the mind creates reality. I know you're better than that, throw me something else. What you did would be like disproving the existence of God by using the example of the Holy Spirit.
You want me to use something better than logic? What do you want me to use? Faith? Do I need to say that I had a divine revelation that you are wrong? Do you even realize that as soon as you indicate your willingness to accept proof, you have already accepted logic as a valid standard for discussion?
Either you are saying that logic does not work or that my formulation is incorrect. No amount of other-worldly analogies would change that. So, tell me, which is it and why?
