The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Religion & Culture / Creation vs. Evolution


Subject:  Re: Libet and free will revisited Date:  3/10/2019  11:51 PM
Author:  1poorguy Number:  26765 of 27156

Fine, but what I have continuously asked and have received no answer from you is what is the measurable evidence against free will. If you don't have any, and I think it is now clear that you don't, then why do you assume your personal experience of free will is wrong?

I have answered it. A few times. The answer is "it's not my burden". As I explained in detail last time. You are making the extraordinary claim that matter has consciousness. You are the one tasked with providing evidence to support your view. Just as it's on the theist to prove the existence of angels (or gods, or whatever). It's not on my to prove there isn't a god, especially if I'm saying "I don't believe there is a god" as opposed to "I believe there are no gods". The latter I may have to assume at least some burden, but not with the former.

Same here. I'm not making an extraordinary claim about consciousness. The most I've done is say that it appears to arise out of complexity as an emergent property. That is hardly original to me, and has been the thinking in this field (to my knowledge) for quite a while.

This was not a trivial result done "just in case".

It was not trivial. However, non-locality and entanglement was already pretty solid. Even I learned about it over 25 years ago.

As for "classical determinism", I believe it holds for classical bodies. Like us. No one ever claimed (at least not recently) that it held for quantum particles, which is what they were measuring. Quantum has never been deterministic. Planetary accretion, thermodynamics, gravity, etc, pretty much all are deterministic. It would be a stretch to say a fetus is both male and female until observed. Etc. Given sufficient information (which often is impractical) we can predict many of those things. The polarization state of photons in an EPR? Not so much.

Also, I disagree that the subjective is evidence. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. It may be a starting point to investigate further, but the doctor is NOT going to put you on chemo because you say your head hurts. He'll do it if there is a mass on the MRI image, and then subsequent biopsy shows it is malignant. The original complaint is quite insufficient to reach the conclusion "cancer".
Copyright 1996-2021 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us