In your opinion what causes christians to believe in Jesus

[arewethereyet]

@Alan V He isn't a psychologist

He could be a bad psychologist.  

I lean more toward believing he's a psycho.

[Thumpalumpacus]

So why are you saying consistency is an accomplishment few pull off, when the theory views consistency as the baseline we are always at and always strive to return to?

Because compartmentalization and hypocrisy are both part of the human condition.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Cognitive dissonance.

Always with the armchair psychology lol. Go ahead, tell us what cognitive dissonance is and how it explains the behavior that Boru alleged described.

FTFY.

Boru

[Paleophyte]

Cognitive dissonance.

Always with the armchair psychology lol. Go ahead, tell us what cognitive dissonance is and how it explains the behavior that Boru alleged?

Cognitive dissonance is nothing more complicated than a loud fart in a quiet church.

[emjay]

Physical laws don't determine what happens, they just summarize what we observe.

You're conflating theory and phenomena here. Our physical laws are descriptive. They help us explain and predict what's going on. The phenomena on which these theories are based exist independent of the theories or explanations. In a complete absence of physicists or observers of any type, rocks will keep falling.

Theories don't determine what happens in the real world. Phenomena do. In a fully deterministic framework those phenomena govern everything. Emergent behaviours are lovely, but first and foremost, they follow the basic underlying rules. Langton's Ant doesn't suddenly decide to start turning left instead of right on a black square just because it's taken up an exciting new career in highway construction.

I'm so used to making faux pas's on these forums that I usually just essentially say 'Sod it' and let them slide But why not make an exception once in a while Basically what you're saying here is what I meant the other day; that the underlying laws of physics, whatever they are, or whatever they turn out to be, determine what happens next. Not theories about them, competing or otherwise, but the actual underlying laws, set in stone, whether we understand them or not... the underlying phenomena. So in your opinion was there anything wrong with my original statement "but it's all in my view still ultimately achieved by and represented in physical neurons and thus determined by physical laws" or was I just being gaslit or misunderstood as usual, intentionally or otherwise? Or is it I that needs to refine my language and/or understanding?

[Paleophyte]

So in your opinion was there anything wrong with my original statement "but it's all in my view still ultimately achieved by and represented in physical neurons and thus determined by physical laws" or was I just being gaslit or misunderstood as usual, intentionally or otherwise? Or is it I that needs to refine my language and/or understanding?

Strictly speaking, the laws are just the stories that we mortals make up to explain the phenomena.

For those of us who don't speak with our sphincters clenched in precise rigour 24/7 the way that you put it was fine.

[emjay]

So in your opinion was there anything wrong with my original statement "but it's all in my view still ultimately achieved by and represented in physical neurons and thus determined by physical laws" or was I just being gaslit or misunderstood as usual, intentionally or otherwise? Or is it I that needs to refine my language and/or understanding?

Strictly speaking, the laws are just the stories that we mortals make up to explain the phenomena.

For those of us who don't speak with our sphincters clenched in precise rigour 24/7 the way that you put it was fine.

Okay, correction noted... I'll try and do better. Danke schön I can be pretty pedantic/literalist about word usage myself, so I do understand and don't want to confuse people on that score if I can avoid it, no matter how tightly clenched they may be

[The Architect Of Fate]

Always with the armchair psychology lol. 

[John 6IX Breezy]

The underlying laws of physics, whatever they are, or whatever they turn out to be, determine what happens next. Not theories about them, competing or otherwise, but the actual underlying laws, set in stone, whether we understand them or not...

The problem here is that you cannot be open to whatever they turn out to be and also assume to know they will be deterministic. And you cannot suggest we may or may not understand them, then speak as if we already understand they're deterministic.

I think the phrases I've highlighted commit you to a more neutral stance.

[The Grand Nudger]

You think that we live in a deterministic universe too, the only difference being a divine determinor...