God, Free Will & Contingency

Does God exist? Is Allah God? Creation vs. evolution.
Is Religion needed? Logic vs. faith. Morality and ethics.
AbdulRahman
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 7:25 am
Location: aka GreatIslam

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by AbdulRahman »

YeeZeVee,
YeeZeVee wrote:1st thing you need to do is., Define free will.,
Very good. Excellent.
Now we are getting some where.
When Muslim define Allah it becomes impposible.
Omnipotent, Omniscence, All powerfull, All seeing, Allah. AND Allah created the Universe, sent Mohammad to the Earth. He will punish people in Hell and reward in heaven.
That's make Allah Impossible.

You should define it. You are the one who beleive in "Free Will", not me.
Go ahead make my day. And do not forget "Free Will" has a word "Free" attached to it. Furthermore only "Will" also has implicit "Free" attached to the concept.

Remember, I will bring you to the point of what percentage of Muslims are bad and need restituion.

I just wish, there were few Muslims here at FFI reading your and my posts, watching your arguments falling apart and your subconscious level taqya is being exposed.
Last edited by AbdulRahman on Sun May 30, 2010 9:46 am, edited 2 times in total.

yeezevee
Posts: 6547
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:17 pm

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by yeezevee »

YeeZeVee,
1st thing you need to do is., Define free will.,
Abdul says : Very good. Excellent.
Now we are getting some where.
really? good we are moving some where..
When Muslim define Allah it becomes impossible.
Did you ask any Muslim bearded Mullah what is Allah? they will define it to you..
I will let you define Free Will because you believe in it.
Go ahead make my day.
Make your day?? lol., What do you mean by I should define? did I open this thread? it is your interest my man., My Interest is Muhammad and his Islam + learn and educate Muslim folks., On the way I may interact with some robots like you..
Remember, I will bring you to the point of what percentage of Muslims are bad and need restituion.
I don't care...
I just wish, there were few Muslims here at FFI reading your and my posts, watching your arguments falling apart and your taqya is being exposed.
errrrr.. You run them out of ffi with your silly robotic logic and you expect them to read FFI., how is is possible dear abdul??

AbdulRahman
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 7:25 am
Location: aka GreatIslam

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by AbdulRahman »

yeezevee wrote:
YeeZeVee,
1st thing you need to do is., Define free will.,
Abdul says : Very good. Excellent.
Now we are getting somewhere.
really? good we are moving somewhere..
When Muslim defines Allah it becomes impossible.
Did you ask any Muslim bearded Mullah what is Allah? they will define it to you..
I will let you define Free Will because you believe in it.
Go ahead make my day.
Make your day?? lol., What do you mean by I should define?
did I open this thread? it is your interest my man., My Interest is Muhammad and his Islam + learns and educates Muslim folks., On the way I may interact with some robots like you..
Remember, I will bring you to the point of what percentage of Muslims are bad and need restitution.
I don't care...
I just wish, there were few Muslims here at FFI reading your and my posts, watching your arguments falling apart and your taqya is being exposed.
errrrr.. You run them out of ffi with your silly robotic logic and you expect them to read FFI., how is possible dear abdul??
You are the one who is now probably seeing just a glimpse of the No Free Will and you are afraid.
I know, you are not 100% sure yet. You are skeptic. That's Ok, It takes decades before you can fully digest and get to the most important truth of mankind.

Your response clearly shows you are defeated.
I will create tornado in your head if you just promise me to keep thinking about it.
Remember, how Qurabani/Eid-ul-Adha issue created hurricane in Debunker, and Iffo's head.
I am going to do the same thing to you.

You must stop doing subconscious level taqya with Muslim.

YeeZeVee wrote: then explain people different types of wills a species or human being may have.., then talk further., what is this nonsense?
Ah ha, now you are talking about different kind of Free Will. Interesting..
YeeZeVee wrote:you get some links and go on accusing people here with the word Baby atheist dear Abdul??
All I have is the power of my reasoning, logic, rationality, and science.

YeeZeVee wrote:My Interest is Muhammad and his Islam
If you can have faith on a false thing like Free Will then Muslims have every right to have their faith on a false Allah and Mohammad.

YeeZeEVe wrote:
Abdul wrote:Remember, I will bring you to the point of what percentage of Muslims are bad and need restitution.
I don't care...
Why? Are you afraid of the truth?
Are you running away from the truth like a coward.

If you are not interested in this topic then why are you in this thread the first place?
Get the hell out of here.
You are the one who is keep coming back.

yeezevee
Posts: 6547
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:17 pm

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by yeezevee »

I see., You are right Abdul., there is no good reason for me even to write this except to answer your two points..
1). I open the thread. But you ran to join it.
I don't even care what you write unless you start Insulting Muslim members at FFI for no good reason except because they are Muslims., You just don't read anything., The reason I am responding to you is, YOU DRAG MY NAME IN TO YOUR POSTS..

here
viewtopic.php?p=108311#p108311" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

People like YeeZeVee who has very shallow understanding of the nature doesn't even want to think or discuss the topic of Free Will. He know he will be cornered. He skips it just like Muslims skip many tough Islamic topics. A true truth seeker will be afraid of nothing when it is a matter of thinking and understanding.
and you are writing that to CAT..,

and you are writing this to Wootah at viewtopic.php?p=108312#p108312" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Look at YeeZeVee's stance. Although he is not a theist and does crticise Islam and other religion severaly but even he falls in the same trap of lossing the sight of reason when pressure to maintain his cognitive consense become too great. He couldn't cope with the cognitive dissonance and pays the price with the truth. Example of a typical half baked, baby atheist. Nevertheless, he is far better than a Muslim.
without such words in your posts, I have no reason to read and write to you., That was indeed my mistake to respond to your posts as above..
2). If you are not interested in this topic then why are you in this thread the first place?
Get the hell out of here.
You are the one who is keep coming back.
same answer as above., But now I will not even care what you write on me.

, But I tell this if you write rubbish against Muslim members of FFI , then I will make sure to put you where you belong..

with best wishes
yeezevee

User avatar
charleslemartel
Posts: 2884
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 2:01 pm
Location: Throne Of Allah

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by charleslemartel »

AbdulRahman wrote:Charles,

I spent a lot of time writing the following post in response to your post. Did you read it?

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=6613&start=200#p111351" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Did you read the following as well?

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=6613&start=200" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes, I have not forgotten your next logical question about Personal Responsibility. I will address that.
But first tell me did you read the above two?
Do you have any thought on those?
Abdul,

I have read those posts. I just don't wish to go in to details regarding those posts. I am already convinced that an "absolute free will" where one can flout the natural laws in non-existent; in fact, I have been convinced of that for quite some time. I have also told you that when I talk of "free will" it is NOT an absolute free will, but the highest degree of freedom WITHIN the natural laws. It is obvious that one of us is not really getting the point of the other. Certain ideas require some time to sink in, and may be one of us will be able to see the point of the other after the requisite time has passed.

Your post about mysticism is misplaced as far as I am concerned. I am neither a votary of Transcendental meditation, and nor a votary of some miraculous form of meditation. The form of meditation I subscribe to tells me to only "observe" without any judgment; no mantra, no imagination, no yantra or no tantra is involved at all. It tells me to be simply be a witness, and not a judge or an analyst. You talked of need of passion in life, whereas I feel that what is really needed in life is "peace". We can discuss this in a separate thread if you wish as this thread is not a proper place for that topic.

I would wait for your views on the issue of responsibility for one's actions.
Similarly in meditation, I have been noticing the arising of thoughts, impulses, ideas, sensations, and noticing how they can just arise without the sense that “I”, as a sovereign will, am doing the thinking, sensing and so on.
I agree fully with this observation as my own experience agrees with it.

I am proceeding on a vacation for two weeks tomorrow. After I come back, I will follow this thread.
Islam is a funny religion which is misunderstood by its scholars and correctly understood by ordinary Muslims.
Faith is keeping your eyes shut when looking at the world, and/or keeping your eyes open only for the beauty of the world.

AbdulRahman
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 7:25 am
Location: aka GreatIslam

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by AbdulRahman »

Charles,

oh, vacation, great.
I myself enjoy vacation a lot. Where are you going? - if you don't mind answering it?
I have been around 50 to 60 countries in the last quarter of a century. From the deep jungle of Amazon river, to Himalayas(Hunza) to Alaska.
Next year we are going to African Safary and Davil's pool. Antartica expedition is on my list for the future.

Have a safe and fun vacation.
We will continue our discussion after you come back.

Note: I do not know if you have seen the link below or not.
There are only 2 good argument in favor of Free Will.
But both are inadequate to explain the contradiction of Free Will.
This is the 1st one.
http://home.sprynet.com/~owl1/fwill.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

AbdulRahman wrote:
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:
The Cat wrote: Solicited conscience
Can you explain what "solicited conscience" is? So far, I see a term as an answer to his question, but no explanation of what that term means, and there is nothing intuitive about that term and therefore the answer is of no value greater than a "word" or "term" without further and clear explanation of it's meaning.
Finally some sign of sanity in your questions.
Oh shut up, you moron. I want anything but your agreement with anything I say as this would only discredit it at this point with the cross eyed sense of reasoning and comprehension you have displayed. Stupid dummy.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

AbdulRahman wrote:
You should have said the actual "Feeling" of love can't be seen in fMRI.
According to you, what's the difference anyway??? The feeling IS the chemical, or at least it might as well be that according to your mechanical point of view. See?? See how you just contradicted yourself, dumb ass?? See how cross eyed you are?? See how you simply cannot think deeply and question properly and work the issue through to it's end?? You didn't even realize that the human reaction to stimulus is the entire crux to the question of free will or not, and instead you were off talking about pool balls. That's because you have a whole bunch of bits and pieces of knowledge, but you don't have the sense to know what to do with them. You haven't been taught reasoning, so it seems, and instead were taught the Quran and now, it's seems self evident that you need to now catch up in the reasoning department and make up for that gap the Quran has caused you.
AbdulRahman wrote: you did not even used the word "feeling" also called "Quala"
That's nothing but an effin word you stupid robot. Congratulations, you went from a mobot to a robot. :lol:
AbdulRahman wrote: You are such a moron and ill-educated that you couldn't even defend your own stance. I had to do it for you.
You defended my stance by introducing a word that didn't even need to be introduced?? What is the matter with your head?? Why aren't you in an insane asylum?? Maybe you actually are and get free internet access. :lol: Dummy.
AbdulRahman wrote: Now back to love.
Are you trying to tell me the feeling of love is not due to the electrochemichal action/reaction and release of oxytocin in the brain?
Yes, that is the thrill of a desire fulfilled and the same chemical that happens when any thrill or desire is fulfilled, and love is not that. Love comes as a result of an understanding or a truth suddenly sighted as a result of a certain attitude towards one's self, life, and people in general. What you are talking about are "thrills" and "possession", but everybody told you otherwise, so you're asleep.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by The Cat »

Reference: viewtopic.php?p=111608#p111608" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
charleslemartel wrote:Unless the thought process is stopped, one can never claim that his actions are not the result of his thoughts...... Even the thoughts happen in the NOW irrespective of whether they are about the past or the future.
Thoughts aren't in the NOW, they keep veiling it as they process through memory which is in the past. Acts can only happens now. When you act the thought process is indeed stopped. Awareness is an act (to be attentive). Think of a soccer game, the players, the action, the 'momentum', the awareness instantly required. Then again an act, in my opinion, isn't necessarily in motion. I think of observation/attention as acts or actualization.

Kr (Krishnamurti): Thought is the result of memory, of collected experience which is very limited, and that the seeking of Reality, God, Truth, Perfection, Beauty is really the projection of thought - in conflict with the present and going towards an idea of the future - and seeing that the pursuit of the future creates time; seeing all this, surely it is obvious that thought must be suspended.

Kr.: To look without thought is to see without the interference of time, knowledge and conflict. This freedom to see is not a reaction; all reactions have causes; to look without reaction is not indifference, aloofness, a cold-blooded withdrawal.
charleslemartel wrote:I am sorry, but that is only an assertion (caprice as a spontaneous desire). Can you give me an example of a SPONTANEOUS desire which in NOT programmed?
Sorry but that's wrong, unless you want to re-edict dictionaries (good luck):
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/caprice" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
a. An impulsive change of mind.
b. An inclination to change one's mind impulsively.
c. A sudden, unpredictable action, change, or series of actions or changes.

Spontaneity
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spontaneity" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
1 : the quality or state of being spontaneous
2 : voluntary or undetermined action or movement; also : its source

Spontaneous
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=spontaneous" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Etymology: 1650s, from L.L. spontaneus "willing, of one's free will," from L. (sua) sponte "of one's own accord, willingly;" of unknown origin.

Spontaneously.
Acting or activated without deliberation; natural tendency without external constraint; acting under stress of emotion or spirit of the moment;
stresses action involving neither judgment nor will; implies lack of prompting and connotes naturalness.
charleslemartel wrote:You can't really claim that those predispositions are without will power unless you acknowledge that one must be aware enough to be able to see his own predispositions. Unless one is fully aware of them, one can't really escape their influence.
Do predispositions have will? Can they act? No. They merely set up the options from which you'll opt or not. Predispositions do not decide.
charleslemartel wrote:If you disagree with Sosan's statement (The Great Way is not difficult for those who have no preferences), explain to me what you understand by "choiceless awareness".
Choiceless awareness might just be another choice (opting out)! A result of conditionment. I feel that anything added to awareness perverts it. Awareness doesn't transform you into a vegetative state, quite the contrary. You can be fully aware while still making choices. You sound like if an enlightened guy couldn't decide to make himself a cup of tea. Preferences can't be done away with, but -preferably- understood.

A. de Mello: When you go through life with preferences but don't let your happiness depend on any one of them, then you're awake. You're moving toward wakefulness.

The so-called enlightenment of the sannyasins sounds culturally pre-conditioned to me. Dispassion and detachment from material life, renouncing all worldly thoughts and desires, masochist vanity. But the Buddha said: ''Show me a monk that doesn't find his soup absolutely delicious...''
charleslemartel wrote:You shouldn't have done anything at all. But "So all I did was to hit a note" destroyed it.
Noops. You can act under this state: you can talk, walk, cook, whatever. But perception becomes vividly present while the time frame becomes different, somehow slowed down. There's a famous zen saying that goes: Before enlightenment you carried wood; after, you still carry wood.

A. de Mello: One day Nasr-ed-Din was strumming a guitar, playing just one note. After a while a crowd collected around him (this was in a marketplace) and one of the men sitting on the ground there said, "That's a nice note you're playing, Mullah, but why don't you vary it a bit the way other musicians do"? "Those fools", Nasr-ed-Din said, "they're searching for the right note. I've found it.''
charleslemartel wrote:If you can be truly aware, you wouldn't even experience the constant renewal of life's flowing. To realize that something is getting renewed, or that life is flowing, you need to remember the past moment too which no longer exists.
To be aware of what then? You really have a static notion of awareness while I uphold its dynamism.
In awareness you cease to be the center of your thoughts and desires, they exists without being you.

A. de Mello: To lose the self is to suddenly realize that you are something other than what you thought you were. You thought you were at the center; now you experience yourself as satellite. You thought you were the dancer; you now experience yourself as the dance.
charleslemartel wrote:the lyricist (Within You, Without You by George Harrison) doesn't have much idea of what he is talking about. Awareness is seeing within yourself, not beyond. The whole of the sleeping humanity sees only beyond itself normally, and probably never within.
Sorry but in all your labelings, your sense of right and wrong, of dictatorial knowledge, I see no awareness only formulas.

kr.: When there is a division between the observer and the observed there is conflict but when the observer is the observed there is no control, no suppression. The self comes to an end. Duality comes to an end. Conflict comes to an end. This is the greatest meditation to come upon this extraordinary thing for the mind to discover for itself the observer is the observed.
charleslemartel wrote:I would say that any wild animal is far more aware than us. Do you disagree? Children, like those wild animals, are far more aware of their surroundings than us. Do you disagree? If not, then think about the thing(s) which differentiates their awareness with that which was talked about by Krishnamurti.
As far as I can remember I've never been an animal or an insect so I don't know. But your authoritarian notions say that you know better in the 'degrees' of awareness. As far as this goes, you're only fooling yourself.

kr.: Authority prevents learning- learning that is not the accumulation of knowledge as memory. Memory always responds in patterns; there is no freedom. A man who is burdened with knowledge, with instructions, who is weighted down by the things he has learned, is never free. He may be most extraordinarily erudite, but his accumulation of knowledge prevents him from being free, and therefore he is incapable of learning.

A. de Mello: We need to be redeemed again. We need to put off the old man, the old nature, the conditioned self, and return to the state of the child but without being a child. When we start off in life, we look at reality with wonder, but it isn't the intelligent wonder of the mystics; it's the formless wonder of the child. Then wonder dies and is replaced by boredom, as we develop language and words and concepts. Then hopefully, if we're lucky, we'll return to wonder again.
charleslemartel wrote:I give up (about enlightenment being acquired or given); I can't see any third possibility. Teach me.
You can't acquire something that you already have! Then again such an acquisition would be in the realm of vanity.

A. de Mello: To acquire happiness you don't have to do anything, because happiness cannot be acquired. Does anybody know why? Because we have it already. How can you acquire what you already have? Then why don't you experience it? Because you've got to drop something. You've got to drop illusions. You don't have to add anything in order to be happy; you've got to drop something. Life is easy, life is delightful. It's only hard on your illusions, your ambitions, your greed, your cravings. Do you know where these things come from? From having identified with all kinds of labels!
charleslemartel wrote:A TV program, or internet, or a sport match, doesn't force us to behave in a particular way as our programmed emotions do.
They do, everything does. Try to watch a sport game without being emotionally captivated. There's nothing wrong with emotions as long as they don't control you, as they're not you. So there's nothing wrong with desires per se. The more you try to control them, the more they are in control of you. If you get aware of that, you simply let them flow. That's true detachment. By trying to dam them, you only enforce them. True detachment is nothing as cold as in renunciation, it's warm as love can be.

Kr.: In this torn desert world there is no love because pleasure and desire play the greatest roles, yet without love your daily life has no meaning. And you cannot have love if there is no beauty. Beauty is not something you see - not a beautiful tree, a beautiful picture, a beautiful building or a beautiful woman. There is beauty only when your heart and mind know what love is. Without love and that sense of beauty there is no virtue, and you know very well that, do what you will, improve society, feed the poor, you will only be creating more mischief, for without love there is only ugliness and poverty in your own heart and mind. But when there is love and beauty, whatever you do is right, whatever you do is in order. If you know how to love, then you can do what you like because it will solve all other problems.
charleslemartel wrote:Let me say it again: not every emotionless moron can be said to be enlightened. Does this statement tell you that Enlightened people are emotionless ?
Choiceless awareness, as in your idea, points to emotionless/desireless state, isn't it? Again, whatever you add to awareness will corrupt it. The only difference between being aware or not is that you don't identify with anything. In this stillness of being, creativity flows pervading. You're being creative by the simple fact that the present is alive and kicking within you.

On and on, I feel that you have a conditioned look over awareness. A need for some guiding authority like a guru. Any form of authority, is it your desire to renouncement, of 'choiceless awareness' or whatever, is a trick of the mind. In fact, every movement of the mind force you back into subjugation. Seeing this is all there is in awareness.

Kr.: Authority destroys, authority perverts, authority corrupts; and a man who follows authority, is destroying himself, and destroying also that which he has placed in a position of authority. The follower destroys the master, as the master destroys the follower. The guru destroys the pupil, as the pupil destroys the guru. Through authority you will never find anything. You must be free of authority to find reality. It is one of the most difficult things to be free of authority, both the outer and the inner....


The key is: not to identify with your labeling self. Try for a little while to see things without putting words over them... so to taste Reality!
If you need an exercise well try not to say: ''I think this'' but ''This Charles of mine thinks so''. Free yourself of your self!

And good, resourcing, vacations!

A. de Mello: Life is a banquet. And the tragedy is that most people are starving to death. That's what I'm really talking about....
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.

User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by The Cat »

AbdulRahman wrote:
The Cat wrote:Solicited conscience in the realm of the present time being. Thus, an actuality stemming out of conscience. So it shouldn't be confused as you do with potentiality, which belongs to data and computing, nor with any absolute.
Solicited Conscience" is nothing but bull shiit. After a lot of time when we corner "Solicited Conscience" then theistic mind come up with a new term "ChuChu Conscience" then "Invisible Choiceability"...then some more bull shiit......Question remains, where the fuuck your will, decision, choice in your brain come from? is there a ghost in your brain? How about soul in your brain? How about god in your brain? How about ChucChu, KuKU in your brain. There correct answer is : your brain has malfunction.

All the people with faith on free will must learn the real problem is not Islam or Christianity but the foundation of these evil is the irrationality, lack of reasoning, illogic, unscientific, a deep hidden desire to believe in some kind of supernatural, call it "Solicited Conscience" or call it “Ghost” in the brain makes no difference.
According to you there's no conscience, only 'ghost/god in the brain'. You might pretty well be the perfect example for that!

Thing is that researches are pointing out that insects and bacterias are using Free Will, they have conscience too you know.

Free Will in bacterias (Martin Heisenberg).
http://www.informationphilosopher.com/s ... isenbergm/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Evidence of randomly generated action — action that is distinct from reaction because it does not depend upon external stimuli — can be found in unicellular organisms. Take the way the bacterium Escherichia coli moves. It has a flagellum that can rotate around its longitudinal axis in either direction: one way drives the bacterium forward, the other causes it to tumble at random so that it ends up facing in a new direction ready for the next phase of forward motion. This ‘random walk’ can be modulated by sensory receptors, enabling the bacterium to find food and the right temperature.

As with a bacterium’s locomotion, the activation of behavioural modules is based on the interplay between chance and lawfulness in the brain. Insufficiently equipped, insufficiently informed and short of time, animals have to find a module that is adaptive. Their brains, in a kind of random walk, continuously preactivate, discard and reconfigure their options, and evaluate their possible short-term and long-term consequences.

The physiology of how this happens has been little investigated. But there is plenty of evidence that an animal’s behaviour cannot be reduced to responses. For example, my lab has demonstrated that fruit flies, in situations they have never encountered, can modify their expectations about the consequences of their actions. They can solve problems that no individual fly in the evolutionary history of the species has solved before. Our experiments show that they actively initiate behaviour.

When you combine some randomness with some "lawful" (read evolved and adequately determined) behaviors you get something like free will.
Anthropologically, Free Will goes back to the domestication of fire and the Agrarian revolution, freeing mankind from some determinism, but perceived by the determinists as acts against the natural order perfectly set forth by God. To them, agriculture was enslaving people as a result of disobedience. It is so represented in the Garden of Eden allegory (Gen.3.17-19; Gen.4).

It is your No-Free-Will view that is theistic, AbdulRahman, i.e. a rehash of God's omnipresence and omnipotence.

Fruit Fly and Free Will, a scientific study...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18684016/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 071806.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1532077920070516" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/vie ... uit_flies/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://brembs.net/spontaneous/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.

User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by The Cat »

AbdulRahman wrote:The Cat.... Anyone who doesn't follow the language of reason, logic, science and rationality can get away with all kind of contradictions. Insane people can say anything.
Talking about contradictions, you're far from being free of them. First you go one to blast the mystics just to come up with a Buddhist blog. Yet according to your logic the whole Nirvana concept is flawed from the first, just like your own reasoning (and anyone else) for that matter. Awareness itself is necessarily neurobiologically conditioned. In fact your position is without issue whatsoever. Why can't you be logic at least with yourself? As any predictable result like enlightenment is forcefully pre-determined. You live in a closed box of determinism, wherein no possible escape can emerge.

But according to the link you provided these fools think that the Nirvanic detachment implies the illusion of living fully un-determined reality in their Nirvana heaven. Yet, you come up and say: ''read it if you want to grow. Read some the the comments below the article.''

http://www.thinkbuddha.org/article/173/ ... -free-will" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Ck -
If I understand correctly, all of us are living without free will, but some of us, like Sue, just choose to recognize that? But…wait…?
He means of course that in the very act of opting for No-Free-Will, Free Will is implied because it's a deliberate choice.
Tom
-It may be that I have no choice but to think about it exactly in this way, But I don’t see how free will is being ruled out, here. To begin, I reject what is a physicalist argument that must find the source actor for our actions. If we DO have free will, then we—not a mini-me or a locus in the brain or a cocked gun needs to be found. Our indelible, invisible-to-the-eye Self is the action-maker. Whether we make choices overtly, or on the run, it is Free Will in action.

In Free the notion of spontaneity is implied, while WILL is an action. Aristotle: ''When the origin of the actions is in him it is also up to him to do them or not.'' Descartes: ''The will is by his very nature so free that it can never be constrained.'' In fact, we are condemned to be free, that is to make choices. Choices, by their very essence, imply freedom to choose between options.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/ ... e-will-an/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Ryan
Even if you believe in free will you still believe that people can only make decisions between options that they are aware of. This principle is simple but when applied thoroughly we still come out understanding that a person’s environment sets the bounds for their decision making processes and thus significantly affects the direction of that person’s life. We still end up believing that we should strike crime at the root and that we should have compassion. It still leads us to humility with an understanding that most of what we have is not purely due to our own efforts. That’s of course not an argument against determinism, but it does mean that those values aren’t an argument for determinism.

Furthermore, Spinoza may have been a determinist, but the general consensus of the world’s major philosophers (if there can be said to be a consensus) is clearly against determinism. Try reading Hume, Kant, Searle, or countless other modern and classical philosophers and you’ll find plenty of reasonable refutations of determinism. Once again, this doesn’t “disprove” mechanistic determinism, but it does show that there are plenty of rational reasons to believe in free-will. So characterizing the idea as “scientifically untenable” is a silly.
In Evolution, Free Will might pretty well be the link between determinism and randomness, life itself being the personification of Free Will.
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.

User avatar
The Cat
Posts: 2055
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by The Cat »

AbdulRahman wrote:Is the feeling of love is not the result of the past relationship memory and future expectation in the brain in the form of electrochemical action/reaction? Answer that?
In Greek the word we translate by love has three different meanings: Eros, Philae and Agape. You are putting them in the same basket but an educated person like you should know the differences. Please point them out...

Well, here is an example of love as agape
if I speak without love, I am no more than a gong booming or a cymbal clashing. And though I have the power of prophecy, to penetrate all mysteries and knowledge, and though I have all the faith necessary to move mountains -- if I am without love, I am nothing. Though I should give away to the poor all that I possess, and even give up my body to be burned -- if I am without love, it will do me no good whatever.

Love is always patient and kind; love is never jealous; love is not boastful or conceited, it is never rude and never seeks its own advantage, it does not take offence or store up grievances. Love does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but finds its joy in the truth. It is always ready to make allowances, to trust, to hope and to endure whatever comes. Paul, 1Cor.1-7

Do you have the slightest idea of what he's talking about? The result of electrochemical action/reaction? Noops, he's not having an erection.
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.

AbdulRahman
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 7:25 am
Location: aka GreatIslam

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by AbdulRahman »

Mohammad BIn Lying the lier,
MBL wrote:Love comes as a result of an understanding or a truth suddenly sighted as a result of a certain attitude towards one's self, life, and people in general.
..and what is understanding?
Is it not a reconfiguration of your neural network (memory) via electrochemical actions in your brain?

Or do you think a ghost just jump into your brain?
You Islamic moron!

By "suddenly" do you mean sponteneously, instanteniously?
Does it take samll amount of time or it is just literally instanteniously - doesn't take any time?
[Please see my post to Charles below about Sponteneous.]

I wish some of the Muslims were still here at FFI reading our post and laughing at you because you are cornered. You unjust, self-righteous, make fun of Islamic faith but you got the faith on Free Will.

Irrationality comes in many forms. It can come as Allah or Ghost Or Free Will or Alien Abduction, Astrology. You have no rights to make fun of Islam while you yourself using the crutch of superstition of Free Will.
Let Muslims rejoice on your being cornered. Muslims and Christians hired me debunk you fake, half-baked baby atheists.

“Feeling” the word you never used, also is the result of electrochemical action. There is no ghost in your brain.
Last edited by AbdulRahman on Mon May 31, 2010 5:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

AbdulRahman
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 7:25 am
Location: aka GreatIslam

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by AbdulRahman »

The Cat,

To tell you the truth most of the content of your post are gibberish as found in the Biblical and Quranic poetic texts. Any half-insane person can give emotional lecture like that. There is a big industry for it out there.

I challenge you to respond these 2 items.

1. Spontaneous - time issue
Please read this one first.
viewtopic.php?f=32&t=6613&start=60#p110393" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What you call “spontaneous” idea/thought popping up in your brain is not instantaneous at all.
It takes very small but finite amount of time. Whether the idea/thought is triggered/invoked from the lowest layer of limbic system, or from the part of the body (spinal cord) that is participate to generate reflexive reactions, or from the subconscious mind or from fully conscious mind, or all of them combined, regardless, these are the result of direct or indirect processing and electrochemical action. This definitely takes very small amount of time but does take time. For example, subconscious mind is about 800 times faster than conscious mind.
a) Feeling of love at the sight of a loved one is not instaneous.
b) Feeling of compassion at the sight of a victim is not instantaneous.
c) Impulse, urge, desire, thought to materialized and then action to jump into a lake to save a drowning child takes small amount of time from the moment the person's mind register the even. Impulsive jump in to the lake, obviously don't have to come from the conscious mind but could come from the subconscious or may be even lower layer of mind/body electro-chemical action/reaction.
None of these are instantaneous.
Save your face. Don’t challenge that.
Don’t let others know the extent of your brain damaged by the faith on supernatural things. I am aware of the fact that you are not aware of your partial theistic brain damage.
2. Love - memory, expectation and electrochemical reaction issue
The Cat wrote:
AbdulRahman wrote:Is the feeling of love is not the result of the past relationship memory and future expectation in the brain in the form of electrochemical action/reaction? Answer that?
In Greek the word we translate by love has three different meanings: Eros, Philae and Agape. You are putting them in the same basket but an educated person like you should know the differences.
Please point them out...
Here is why I claim your brain has malfunction with theistic ideas.
Just to distract a debate you brought up Eros, Philae and Agape.
I did not have to discreminate between Eros, Philae and Agape because my argument is “INDEPENDENT of category of love. Not only this, my argument holds true for all kind of emotion, hate, anger, fear.
There are not only 3 category of loves. In the dictionary or in the history you might have found those 3 catagory of love. One can have hundreds of category of love. You can make dozen of category of love and name them. Then make sub category of love and name them. It doesn’t matter for the argument that "All emotions, including all kinds of love is the result of electro-chemical actiona/reaction in your body and brain."

The Cat,

Please don’t lower yourself attempting to cover up your error in logic processing by introducing irrelevant issues or topic.
Remember, to defend a lie you have no other option but to take help of another lie. A chain of logic is as strong as its weakest link.
so accept your error of unnecessarily bringing upEros, Philae and Agape and move on.
Drop your deception and move on.
The sooner you drop the lies the better off you will be. collect truth only and mind will work faster. You will deveop intuition (subconscious level processing) to extract truth from lies with lightining speed.
But how to determine what is true and what is not?
Answer: By reason, logic, rationality, and science.
By "qualified, 3rd party, double blind, successive approximation, statistical methodlogy."
Also rememeber, just because something gives you cognitive consonance doesn't necessarily mean it is true.

More irelavent gibberish.
Spoiler! :
Well, here is an example of love as agape
if I speak without love, I am no more than a gong booming or a cymbal clashing. And though I have the power of prophecy, to penetrate all mysteries and knowledge, and though I have all the faith necessary to move mountains -- if I am without love, I am nothing. Though I should give away to the poor all that I possess, and even give up my body to be burned -- if I am without love, it will do me no good whatever.
1.
The Cat wrote:Life itself being the personification of Free Will.
2. Life itself being the personification of Jesus.
3. Life itself being the personification of Allah.
You live in a closed box of determinism
False.
Here is my position.
The conclusion of No Free Will is not on the basis of determinism but on the basis HUP (Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle) AND chain of cause and effect.
Determinism implies, if you roll the universe again then exactly same thing will happen.
Because of HUP I do not hold that view.

Since you are not trained to defend an idea scientifically let me do it for you.
There are only 2 good argument in favor of Free Will.
But both are inadequate to explain the contradiction of Free Will.
This is the 1st one.
http://home.sprynet.com/~owl1/fwill.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Last edited by AbdulRahman on Tue Jun 01, 2010 6:48 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
charleslemartel
Posts: 2884
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 2:01 pm
Location: Throne Of Allah

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by charleslemartel »

Before I proceed on my vacation, I would respond to this post.
The Cat wrote: Thoughts aren't in the NOW, they keep veiling it as they process through memory which is in the past. Acts can only happens now.
Can you not be aware of your thoughts in this very moment?
The fact that they keep veiling the NOW tells you that they happen in the present. Something which belongs to the past or the future cannot veil this moment. Give this a thought.
When you act the thought process is indeed stopped. Awareness is an act (to be attentive). Think of a soccer game, the players, the action, the 'momentum', the awareness instantly required. Then again an act, in my opinion, isn't necessarily in motion. I think of observation/attention as acts or actualization.
Thoughts and most of our actions continue simultaneously. Only the actions which require intense awareness allow no room for thoughts in the present moment. That is why it is said again and again that one should act with total awareness. It is not the action which dispels the thoughts; it is awareness.
Kr (Krishnamurti): Thought is the result of memory, of collected experience which is very limited, and that the seeking of Reality, God, Truth, Perfection, Beauty is really the projection of thought - in conflict with the present and going towards an idea of the future - and seeing that the pursuit of the future creates time; seeing all this, surely it is obvious that thought must be suspended.

Kr.: To look without thought is to see without the interference of time, knowledge and conflict. This freedom to see is not a reaction; all reactions have causes; to look without reaction is not indifference, aloofness, a cold-blooded withdrawal.
None of these quotes suggest that thoughts don't happen in the present. Each moment is the present moment whether we are aware or act as somnambulists. Close your eyes right now, and try to see if there are any thoughts in your mind.
Sorry but that's wrong, unless you want to re-edict dictionaries (good luck):
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/caprice" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
a. An impulsive change of mind.
b. An inclination to change one's mind impulsively.
c. A sudden, unpredictable action, change, or series of actions or changes.

Spontaneity
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/spontaneity" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
1 : the quality or state of being spontaneous
2 : voluntary or undetermined action or movement; also : its source

Spontaneous
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=spontaneous" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Etymology: 1650s, from L.L. spontaneus "willing, of one's free will," from L. (sua) sponte "of one's own accord, willingly;" of unknown origin.

Spontaneously.
Acting or activated without deliberation; natural tendency without external constraint; acting under stress of emotion or spirit of the moment;
stresses action involving neither judgment nor will; implies lack of prompting and connotes naturalness.
I know the meaning of spontaneity, Cat. But we are not talking of dictionaries and word meanings, are we? All I asked you is to give me an example of a SPONTANEOUS desire which in NOT programmed.
Do predispositions have will? Can they act? No. They merely set up the options from which you'll opt or not. Predispositions do not decide.
A robot can act, but that doesn't mean it has a will.
Choiceless awareness might just be another choice (opting out)! A result of conditionment. I feel that anything added to awareness perverts it. Awareness doesn't transform you into a vegetative state, quite the contrary. You can be fully aware while still making choices. You sound like if an enlightened guy couldn't decide to make himself a cup of tea. Preferences can't be done away with, but -preferably- understood.
No, no, you are getting it wrong. Choiceless awareness doesn't mean one stops making choices. It simply means that you become aware of everything that is happening in and around you in this very moment. You don't focus your awareness on certain things and exclude others. It means you become aware of things without making any judgments. You don't prefer to be aware of pleasant sensations, and try to forget unpleasant ones. You simply become aware of whatever happens in this moment.

kr: You can’t be totally aware if you are choosing. If you say “This is right and that is wrong,” the right and the wrong depend on your conditioning. What is right to you may be wrong in the Far East. You believe in a savior, in the Christ, but they don’t, and you think they will go to hell unless they believe as you do. …To be aware is to be conscious of all this, choicelessly, it is to be aware totally of all your conscious and unconscious reactions. And you can’t be aware totally if you are condemning, if you are judging, if you are justifying, or if you say, “I will keep my beliefs, my experiences, my knowledge.” Then you are only partially aware, and partial awareness is really blindness.
A. de Mello: When you go through life with preferences but don't let your happiness depend on any one of them, then you're awake. You're moving toward wakefulness.
This is the first statement of De Mello I disagree with. If you have preferences, your happiness is bound to depend on them; you simply can't escape that.

But I can see his point :lol:
The so-called enlightenment of the sannyasins sounds culturally pre-conditioned to me. Dispassion and detachment from material life, renouncing all worldly thoughts and desires, masochist vanity. But the Buddha said: ''Show me a monk that doesn't find his soup absolutely delicious...''
Detachment is not the opposite of attachment like repulsion is opposite of attraction. Detachment means you are neither attracted towards something nor you are repelled by it. Renouncing worldly thoughts, desires and possessions is the other extreme of embracing them. Enlightenment is letting go of the hold you have over these things.

Buddha was right. One doesn't have to "renounce" anything. One simply enjoys things without pursuing them.
charleslemartel wrote:You shouldn't have done anything at all. But "So all I did was to hit a note" destroyed it.
Noops. You can act under this state: you can talk, walk, cook, whatever. But perception becomes vividly present while the time frame becomes different, somehow slowed down. There's a famous zen saying that goes: Before enlightenment you carried wood; after, you still carry wood.
I agree. But in the initial stages, action distracts from the experience.
charleslemartel wrote:If you can be truly aware, you wouldn't even experience the constant renewal of life's flowing. To realize that something is getting renewed, or that life is flowing, you need to remember the past moment too which no longer exists.
To be aware of what then? You really have a static notion of awareness while I uphold its dynamism.
To be aware of nothing in particular, but of everything. Dynamism is the property of events/things, and not of the awareness itself. We continue focusing awareness to one thing after another, and that is why the feeling that it is dynamic. Awareness is like a mirror which reflects all the dynamism in and around you; the mirror itself is not dynamic.

kr: In self-awareness there is no need for confession, for self-awareness creates the mirror in which all things are reflected without distortion. Every thought- feeling is thrown, as it were, on the screen of awareness to be observed, studied and understood; but this flow of understanding is blocked when there is condemnation or acceptance, judgment or identification. The more the screen is watched and understood—not as a duty or enforced practice, but because pain and sorrow have created the insatiable interest that brings its own discipline—the greater the intensity of awareness, and this in turn brings heightened understanding.

In awareness you cease to be the center of your thoughts and desires, they exists without being you.

A. de Mello: To lose the self is to suddenly realize that you are something other than what you thought you were. You thought you were at the center; now you experience yourself as satellite. You thought you were the dancer; you now experience yourself as the dance.
Of course, yes.
charleslemartel wrote:the lyricist (Within You, Without You by George Harrison) doesn't have much idea of what he is talking about. Awareness is seeing within yourself, not beyond. The whole of the sleeping humanity sees only beyond itself normally, and probably never within.
Sorry but in all your labelings, your sense of right and wrong, of dictatorial knowledge, I see no awareness only formulas.

kr.: When there is a division between the observer and the observed there is conflict but when the observer is the observed there is no control, no suppression. The self comes to an end. Duality comes to an end. Conflict comes to an end. This is the greatest meditation to come upon this extraordinary thing for the mind to discover for itself the observer is the observed.
Observer can be the observed only when one looks within, and not without.
charleslemartel wrote:I would say that any wild animal is far more aware than us. Do you disagree? Children, like those wild animals, are far more aware of their surroundings than us. Do you disagree? If not, then think about the thing(s) which differentiates their awareness with that which was talked about by Krishnamurti.
As far as I can remember I've never been an animal or an insect so I don't know. But your authoritarian notions say that you know better in the 'degrees' of awareness. As far as this goes, you're only fooling yourself.
One doesn't have to be an animal to know that they are more aware of their surroundings than us. They catch all the sounds and smells far better than us; their very survival depends on this. The more secure we become, the more is the tendency to be less and less aware. The humans living in the jungles are more aware than us; they have to be.
Spoiler! :
kr.: Authority prevents learning- learning that is not the accumulation of knowledge as memory. Memory always responds in patterns; there is no freedom. A man who is burdened with knowledge, with instructions, who is weighted down by the things he has learned, is never free. He may be most extraordinarily erudite, but his accumulation of knowledge prevents him from being free, and therefore he is incapable of learning.

A. de Mello: We need to be redeemed again. We need to put off the old man, the old nature, the conditioned self, and return to the state of the child but without being a child. When we start off in life, we look at reality with wonder, but it isn't the intelligent wonder of the mystics; it's the formless wonder of the child. Then wonder dies and is replaced by boredom, as we develop language and words and concepts. Then hopefully, if we're lucky, we'll return to wonder again.
Do these quotes tell me that I should shut up and not tell anything which I think I know? I don't know how you get the idea that I have authoritarian notions. And I don't know what you are disagreeing with. Are you saying that there are no different degrees of awareness?
charleslemartel wrote:I give up (about enlightenment being acquired or given); I can't see any third possibility. Teach me.
You can't acquire something that you already have! Then again such an acquisition would be in the realm of vanity.
Yes, we already have the ore containing the metal. I talked of "acquiring" in the sense that one still has to extract the metal by removing/dropping the slag.
There's nothing wrong with emotions as long as they don't control you
The key words are in the bold. That is what I mean by "tyranny of the emotions" because they control us. And one frees oneself of their control by being aware of them.
Choiceless awareness, as in your idea, points to emotionless/desireless state, isn't it? Again, whatever you add to awareness will corrupt it. The only difference between being aware or not is that you don't identify with anything.
I have already explained above what I mean by Choiceless awareness.
On and on, I feel that you have a conditioned look over awareness. A need for some guiding authority like a guru.
I don't know how you get that feeling. One certainly doesn't need a guide to be aware; initially yes, but not when one once gets the trick.
And good, resourcing, vacations!
Thanks.
Islam is a funny religion which is misunderstood by its scholars and correctly understood by ordinary Muslims.
Faith is keeping your eyes shut when looking at the world, and/or keeping your eyes open only for the beauty of the world.

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

ObfoolRahman wrote:Mohammad BIn Lying the lier,
MBL wrote:Love comes as a result of an understanding or a truth suddenly sighted as a result of a certain attitude towards one's self, life, and people in general.
..and what is understanding?
How can we truly know? How can we "understand" understanding itself? That is like the knife cutting itself or the tooth biting itself.
ObfoolRahman wrote: Is it not a reconfiguration of your neural network (memory) via electrochemical actions in your brain?
It could sure seem that way.
ObfoolRahman wrote: Or do you think a ghost just jump into your brain?
You Islamic moron!
First of all, if it was a ghost, it wouldn't be one that just jumped into your brain and would perhaps be one that existed before, or caused your brain to start acting like a brain. Second of all, you can't be sure about anything, and the person who is, is surely the moron, and you are more like the Muslim than I am. You are very dognmatic, like the Muslims, but you merely switched from one dogmatic view to another. Congatulations.
ObfoolRahman wrote: By "suddenly" do you mean sponteneously, instanteniously?
No, it was just the figurative use of the term that people commonly invoke. I have to keep in mind that everything has to be very very explicit with you because you simply don't have the common sense to read between the lines. That's fine, I will try to do so in the future, assuming I have some time to waste. :D
ObfoolRahman wrote: Does it take samll amount of time or it is just literally instanteniously - doesn't take any time?
Misunderstood by you and answered.
ObfoolRahman wrote: [Please see my post to Charles below about Sponteneous.]
I don't have to. you merely think i have to as if you have some sort of profound point that I never thought of. you don't. Is that plain enough for you??
ObfoolRahman wrote: I wish some of the Muslims were still here at FFI reading our post and laughing at you because you are cornered.
I wish you would bring them here, because even THEY would see that I am anything BUT cornered. You are staring at the corner imagining things. :lol: I guess you can take the Muslim out of Islam, but you can't take the Islam out of the Muslim!! :lol: :lol: There's always still that crippled, slightly twisted or cross eyed sense of reasoning. My my my, so you were a former crossed eyed Muslim that came here and insisted he was right when you were a Muslim?? If so, what does that say?? From one dogma to the next. you got rid of your Islamism, but managed to still preserve your dogmatism. Congratulation!!! :lol:
ObfoolRahman wrote: You unjust, self-righteous, make fun of Islamic faith but you got the faith on Free Will.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! By the way, bright boy, show me the exact thing I said that says I have "faith" in free will. Let's go fat mouth. Show it or STFU. :lol:
ObfoolRahman wrote: Irrationality comes in many forms.
Coming from the expert?? :lol: Takes one to know one, right?? Have you ever heard of any of these phrases I'm saying to you?? I don';t think you have, or else it would be common sense for you not to say these things and set yourself up so easily and badly..
ObfoolRahman wrote: It can come as Allah or Ghost Or Free Will or Alien Abduction, Astrology. You have no rights to make fun of Islam while you yourself using the crutch of superstition of Free Will.
Where?? Quote the sentence. I never once said it necessarily exists and merely claimed the necessary conditions that would have to exist before it could. But you have such strong, preconceived notions about everything, that you simply cannot see when someone is telling you this. You do not see things as they are, you see them as you are. Perhaps, you're nose was buried in the Quran in the past and that you think that's over now that it isn't buried in the Quran and is instead buried in science. But an education in philosophy is very important as well. Science gives you information, philosophy and logic teaches you how to think. This is what you need right now.

ObfoolRahman wrote: Let Muslims rejoice on your being cornered.
Can you imitiate the sound of many people rejoicing?? Because that's what you'll need to do. :lol:
ObfoolRahman wrote: Muslims and Christians hired me debunk you fake, half-baked baby atheists.
You sir, are a liar when you make that claim. But as I told you before, I suppose lying isn't a shameful act where you come from. But the funny part is that you're too stupid to even see the obvious hole in your claim, and why i can tell it's a lie in two seconds. So congratulations, you've left Islam and taken up science, but you still have the reasoning abilities of a child. And not only that, you've shown the desperation of resorting to lying. How shameful.
ObfoolRahman wrote: “Feeling” the word you never used, also is the result of electrochemical action. There is no ghost in your brain.
Nobody can be sure of that, especially a dogmatic knucklehead such as yourself. What decides to do something with that electrochemical action? When the doctor hits your knee, what is that?? That's a "reflex", right?? No thought given, a pure mechanical and chemical reaction. So according to your point of view, everything we do is a reflex reaction??? Are you sure of that?? I know people who can run scientific rings around you and strangly enough, they're not sure of that.
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

User avatar
Fathom
Posts: 894
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:50 am

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by Fathom »

AbdulRahman wrote:
Fathom wrote:
Abdul wrote:As I said, if you ask me an intelligent question then you wil get a to the point response from me.
Go ahead try.
I have asked you 2 very intelligent questions in my previous post and you have not answered them at all. In fact, I asked you those very same questions a number of times in this thread, but you never answer them.

Go ahead try.
Fathom,

Pleasse ask me again. Please just cut and paste and put number in the question.
I will address them. I hope MBL will learn from my respond too.

I wanted to discuss the implications of No Free Will in our sense of morality, crime and punishment, revenge, restitution and retribution, % of Muslims who have become catalist to the terrorism, right and wrong, good and bad, true and false etc.
But alas, we are stuck at the very first step.

Please read this post and specially the second link in the post first.
viewtopic.php?f=32&t=6613&p=111340#p111240" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
1. You simply failed to logically understand my analogy. Either that, or you are avoiding it because you cannot argue with it. My hunter sees 3 X the lion when mathematically there are only 2. Both are supposedly true. So once again, answer the question:

How can both be true?

2. Can you conclusively prove that there ever was an initial condition/origin of existence?

AbdulRahman
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 7:25 am
Location: aka GreatIslam

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by AbdulRahman »

[color=#FF0000][b]Fathom[/b][/color] wrote:
Let us go back in time to a cave man. This cave man is a hunter of lions. He has always hunted mature adult lions for his tribe. He knows everything about hunting lions. Then, one day he was standing outside his cave, and he seen a lion running towards him. The lion is the same size as every lion he has ever seen. His mind sees 1 lion.

Suddenly, he sees another lion also running towards him, twice the size as the first lion. It is the largest lion he has ever seen; twice the size of any lion he has ever seen. In his mind he remembers seeing 2 lions in the past, but he has never seen anything like this before. In the past, he would stand and face two lions, but never 3 or more. But at this moment, although there are only 2 lions, he computes that there are 3 because one of them is twice the size as a normal lion.

In the mind of that cave man, 1 + 1 = 3 because one of the lions is twice as large as normal. He sees 3 X the lion, instead of 2 X.

My point? Stringent mathematics can only show you part of the whole picture, but not all of it. There are other ways of understanding what we see.

Fathom,


I agree the part highlighted in red.
To illustrate your point I gave you a simpler, a better example of bad usage of mathematics.
With one eye if one can see one mile down the road then how far he/she can see with two eyes.
Obviously, the correct answer is, still 1 mile. But misuse of mathematics could show 2 miles.
You did not understand any of these. You wrote my example has nothing to with your (long) example.
I have said it over and over again that we, scientist/philosopher considers everything under the SUN.
Fathom wrote:1. You simply failed to logically understand my analogy. Either that, or you are avoiding it because you cannot argue with it. My hunter sees 3 X the lion when mathematically there are only 2. Both are supposedly true. So once again, answer the question:
A lion is defined as 4 legs, 2 eyes, etc. therefore, there are only 2 lions. Size and weight is not the part of a lion definition.
If one has to compute how much strength one need to fight one small and one big lion then one can do that too.
Don’t be stupid. Show me where is the flaw in my logic on Fee Will without diverting the discussion.
FAthom wrote:2. Can you conclusively prove that there ever was an initial condition/origin of existence?
I assume you mean existence of big-bang.
Nothing is 100% guaranteed in science. Only one explanation is better than the other. If the difference is small then we can consider both explanations. But if the difference is huge then we will drop one and pick the better explanation.
Big-Bang is more probable than any other explanation.

Most importantly, my argument about cause and effect via an analogy of 15-ball pool game, is independent of Big-bang, multiverse, universe existing forever, what have you.

Now, let’s go back to the topic of Free Will.
If you believe in it then you show me where it is and where does it come from in your brain?
If you had belief in God then I would have asked you the same question.

To refresh your memory:
Since all happenings in the universe, no matter how minutes it is, no matter if it is inside of our body, brain or outside, follows strict laws of nature, “Cause and effect”. In addition, our thoughts, memory, ideas in our head is the result of a continuous chain of electrochemical action in our body. This are triggered either or invoked by inside our outside of our body.
Remind you that we do not make or change those laws of nature on the fly.

Where is the free will then?
Where does it come from?
Is there a ghost in your brain?

Why are you refusing to grow up?
You have given up God.
Now it is time to take the next step. Give up the false idea of Free Will too.

AbdulRahman
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 7:25 am
Location: aka GreatIslam

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by AbdulRahman »

Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:
ObfoolRahman wrote: By "suddenly" do you mean spontaneously, instantaneously?
No, it was just the figurative use of the term that people commonly invoke. I have to keep in mind that everything has to be very very explicit with you because you simply don't have the common sense to read between the lines. That's fine, I will try to do so in the future.
Mohammad Bin Lying,

You are not only a moron but also a fraud. You are a liar. You are an intellectually dishonest person. You do double talk like Muslim do taqya. Below is your agreement with The Cat about Free Will is spontaneous and instantaneous.
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:
The Cat wrote:
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote: Doesn't ones wisdom (or perceived wisdom) merely come from their experiences (environment) and their mental abilities and/or genetic predispositions?
That wisdom is then part of the OPTIONS (experiences, environment, etc). There's no Free Will involved in the world of options or contingency. It stems from an -original- action once the options (static) are left over in the course of acting.

Free Will is instantaneous. It can only exist in the present, not in the past-future equation.
Agreed again.
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:
ObfoolRahman wrote:Mohammad BIn Lying the liar,
MBL wrote:Love comes as a result of an understanding or a truth suddenly sighted as a result of a certain attitude towards one's self, life, and people in general.
..and what is understanding?
How can we truly know? How can we "understand" understanding itself? That is like the knife cutting itself or the tooth biting itself.
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote: That is like the knife cutting itself or the tooth biting itself
Your above statement doesn’t say anything. It is gibberish as found in Quranic and Biblical texts. You will see below how rational mind define “understanding".
You owe me for educating you on this.
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:
Abdul wrote: "Understanding” if it is it not a reconfiguration of your neural network (memory) via electrochemical actions in your brain then what is it?
It could sure seem that way.
“Could” “Sure” in the same sentence, in the context they are contradictory.
Your Islamic upbringing taqya, double talk.
There is no other better way to define “Understanding”. than this....
Abdul wrote:As one cross checks his/her ideas from many different angles more valid neural connections are established and invalid connections are taken down. An “Understood Mind” can retrieve his/her memory/idea from many different angles, or can be triggered by far more things than a non understood mind. However, understood indoctrinated mind, both can recite the same result.
More valid connection in the brain, least invalid connection in the brain, produces a coherent brain, an understood brain. This brain will be able to process information far faster than others and get to the truth a lot quicker.
There is no mystery there. It is very simple to me.
But you were so weak to acknowledge that.
You wrote:
It could sure seem that way.
That is a very weak statement of yours. Weak statements come from weak mind.
ObfoolRahman wrote: Irrationality can come as Allah or Ghost Or Free Will or Alien Abduction, Astrology. You have no rights to make fun of Islam while you yourself using the crutch of superstition of Free Will.
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Where?? Quote the sentence. I never once said it necessarily exists and merely claimed the necessary conditions that would have to exist before it could. But you have such strong, preconceived notions about everything, that you simply cannot see when someone is telling you this. You do not see things as they are, you see them as you are. Perhaps, you're nose was buried in the Quran in the past and that you think that's over now that it isn't buried in the Quran and is instead buried in science. But an education in philosophy is very important as well. Science gives you information, philosophy and logic teaches you how to think. This is what you need right now.
Smart people judges other’s arguments not only by what they say but what they did not say. If you do not pass a more accurate statement when it was available to you then you are either do not understand or playing deception. Here is the proof:
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:The only way there can be free will is if someone no longer acts with their perceived self interest in mind.
You should have said. “No one has free will. Free Will is an illusion. Period.”You need to understand, that your interest or not, you can’t do anything other than what nature will do you. You can’t even think without nature making you think. There is no IFs. No BUTs, period.
You not being able to understand and say the way I wrote above shows, you are still a fake, half-baked baby atheist, who is in love with his/her Faith on Free Will. You just love to discredit Muslims while guilty of same illogic.

Philosophy without reason, logic, rationality, and science is fairy tale. Go ahead believe on Santa.
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Nobody can be sure of that, especially a dogmatic knucklehead such as yourself. What decides to do something with that electrochemical action? When the doctor hits your knee, what is that?? That's a "reflex", right?? No thought given, a pure mechanical and chemical reaction. So according to your point of view, everything we do is a reflex reaction??? Are you sure of that?? I know people who can run scientific rings around you and strangely enough, they're not sure of that.
In science there is nothing 100% guaranteed. But still one explanation is better than other.
1. Reflex reaction by passes conscious level computing. Reflex action is little computing at the lower than limbic system. Reflex action is just pass through conscious layer.
2. Intuition and subconscious level computation Practice pushes initial conscious level effortful computing (when babies learn to walk, or toddler learning to bike etc.) to the subconscious level. By practice responsibility of future processing is pushed down the subconscious level so that later it can be used directly from the subconscious mind without conscious effort. It frees up the conscious mind for more difficult cognitive tasks. Sub conscious mind is 800 times faster than conscious mind. Intuition originates from subconscious or sometime even from the lower level of limbic system.
3. Cognition-conscious level computing No. Everything we do is not reflex action. When computing takes place in the conscious level it is not reflexive reaction nor intuition. We are aware of some of the computing results that occur in conscious mind only. We are not aware of the computing that are occurring in the lower level. Our mind computing and instructing heart to beat faster or slower or make us to breath harder or softer all the time. We are not aware of that. But brain is computing.
First the pre-thought activity starts from the lower level then moves to the higher level. When it gets to the conscious level only then we are aware of that thought, that you call Free Will, choice, or decision. But that choice is already have started a long before you realize it. That is why Free Will is an illusion.
Thought doesn’t affects matter but matter generates thought. A train of “cause of affect” already has departed from your lover level of computation in our body before we are aware of it as thought/free will. Thought is just a passive helpless result of a priory electrochemical action triggered by internal or external events. Thought doesn’t affect matter but the reverse is true.

Awareness is only a state. A state of brain. Brain functions are purely of matter and energy (electro-chemical) – material world.
Leave mystic bullshiit now.
You have given up Allah
Now it is time for you to take the next giant step, give up the false faith on Free Will.
If you have even a bone of intellectual honestly left in your body or brain then you should thank me for this. I did not do cut and paste. I typed it up for you.

Understand and then say, “There is no free will, whatsoever. Period.”
Can you say that?
And don’t lie to me know.
You have said, that Buddha comes close to it (Free Will)
No. No Budha, no Mohammad, No Jesus, No one in the entire universe, no body, had ever had or have any free will of any sort, ever.
Can you say that?
Nop. You want to maintain your superstition.
You are going to loop around, go around the bushes; play taqya game clearly shows you haven’t understood the story of NO Free Will.

User avatar
Muhammad bin Lyin
Posts: 5859
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:19 pm
Location: A Mosque on Uranus

Re: God, Free Will & Contingency

Post by Muhammad bin Lyin »

ObfoolRahman wrote: You are not only a moron but also a fraud.
How can i be a fraud when i never made any claims about myself?? See?? See what an idiot you are making of yourself?? And you claim that people pay you to make an arss of yourself like this and we are supposed to believe that?? :lol:
ObfoolRahman wrote: You are a liar. You are an intellectually dishonest person.
You're just trying to call me that because I caught you lying. You're so stupid that you didn't think someone would see that you were lying right away. And now, you are so illogical that you think you can merely attempt the childish saying "I know you are but what am I". Every word yuou use for me, is actually an admittance of how you see yourself. you know you lied and got caught, so now I am a liar. You know you are frustrated, so now I am frustrated.
ObfoolRahman wrote:
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote: Doesn't ones wisdom (or perceived wisdom) merely come from their experiences (environment) and their mental abilities and/or genetic predispositions?
That wisdom is then part of the OPTIONS (experiences, environment, etc). There's no Free Will involved in the world of options or contingency. It stems from an -original- action once the options (static) are left over in the course of acting.

Free Will is instantaneous. It can only exist in the present, not in the past-future equation.
Agreed again.[/quote]

I agreed that these would be the only conditions that free will could exist in if it existed, and you didn't read the part where I asked him whether the actions that he thinks are spontaneous are really spontaneous. So once again, you have twisted, incomplete information. You are the cross eyed moron, who can't follow the conversation properly once again.
ObfoolRahman wrote: Mohammad BIn Lying the liar,
And, you are shown to be wrong again. Don't you get tired of continually being shown to be wrong? I would.
ObfoolRahman wrote:
MBL wrote:Love comes as a result of an understanding or a truth suddenly sighted as a result of a certain attitude towards one's self, life, and people in general.
..and what is understanding?
How can we truly know? How can we "understand" understanding itself? That is like the knife cutting itself or the tooth biting itself.
That is like the knife cutting itself or the tooth biting itself
Your above statement doesn’t say anything. It is gibberish as found in Quranic and Biblical texts.
No it's not in the Bible or the Quran. Show me where since you claim it is. You can't because that has it's roots in Eastern thought. So yet again, you are wrong. Wow, do you say anything that is actually correct??
ObfoolRahman wrote: You will see below how rational mind define “understanding".
You owe me for educating you on this.
:lotpot: Abdul the fool. I owe you for the good laughs you provide, but that's about all.
ObfoolRahman wrote:
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:
ObfoolRahman wrote: "Understanding” if it is it not a reconfiguration of your neural network (memory) via electrochemical actions in your brain then what is it?
It could sure seem that way.
“Could” “Sure” in the same sentence, in the context they are contradictory.
You mean someone can't say "I could be sure about it if I.....??? What an arss.
ObfoolRahman wrote: Your Islamic upbringing taqya, double talk.
I was raised as a Catholic in the US. WOW, you get EVERYTHING wrong. It's almost like it's a talent for you. If I were a former Muslim, do you think i would equate a turban with a diaper in my avatar?? What is the matter with your head?? It's blinking right in front of you and you don't even notice. Anybody with the least amount of common sense could know that i was never a Muslim and never an Arab, Persian, Egyptian, Indian....If I was, i certainly wouldn't be making fun of turbans and long beards.

ObfoolRahman wrote: There is no other better way to define “Understanding”. than this....
Abdul wrote:As one cross checks his/her ideas from many different angles more valid neural connections are established and invalid connections are taken down. An “Understood Mind” can retrieve his/her memory/idea from many different angles, or can be triggered by far more things than a non understood mind. However, understood indoctrinated mind, both can recite the same result.
More valid connection in the brain, least invalid connection in the brain, produces a coherent brain, an understood brain. This brain will be able to process information far faster than others and get to the truth a lot quicker.
There is no mystery there. It is very simple to me.
You don't think I've seen that definition before?? :lol: The person cannot think deeply enough about the problem. He thinks he's right and you think he's right, because you both have a very narrow focus in your thinking. It's not wrong, it's merely incomplete. So i'm sure to you, that this definition seems perfectly fine.

ObfoolRahman wrote: But you were so weak to acknowledge that.
I'm weak when I acknowledge something??? Do you get free internet access at the mental hospital you are writing from?

ObfoolRahman wrote: You wrote:
It could sure seem that way.
That is a very weak statement of yours. Weak statements come from weak mind.
One speaks firmly only about black and white issues or "self evident" truths.
ObfoolRahman wrote: Irrationality can come as Allah or Ghost Or Free Will or Alien Abduction, Astrology. You have no rights to make fun of Islam while you yourself using the crutch of superstition of Free Will.
I never said free will necessarily exists and have merely said the conditions that must exist for free will to be able to exist. In order for free will to be able to exist, XYZ cionditions would have to be met. That's precisely what I have been saying this entire time, but you still can't get that through your thick head. You need absolute black and whites because that's all your limited focus can understand.
ObfoolRahman wrote:
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Where?? Quote the sentence. I never once said it necessarily exists and merely claimed the necessary conditions that would have to exist before it could. But you have such strong, preconceived notions about everything, that you simply cannot see when someone is telling you this. You do not see things as they are, you see them as you are. Perhaps, you're nose was buried in the Quran in the past and that you think that's over now that it isn't buried in the Quran and is instead buried in science. But an education in philosophy is very important as well. Science gives you information, philosophy and logic teaches you how to think. This is what you need right now.
Smart people judges other’s arguments not only by what they say but what they did not say. If you do not pass a more accurate statement when it was available to you then you are either do not understand or playing deception. Here is the proof:
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:The only way there can be free will is if someone no longer acts with their perceived self interest in mind.
You should have said. “No one has free will. Free Will is an illusion. Period.”
But that would mean that it is impossible for one to behave in any other way other than in their own self interest, and i am not convinced that this is impossible. That is the crux of the argument and we've been here about 6 times now. you claim that's impossible and I don't. So why are we still discussing this retard?? What does it take with you? Why are you so thick?
ObfoolRahman wrote: You need to understand, that your interest or not, you can’t do anything other than what nature will do you.
You can decide to react in the most likely way that meets your perceived self interest and that would be the expected, deterministic reaction. But, someone can decide to not serve their self interest, and that would break the last link on the deterministic chain right at it's most important part, the human reaction. Although the latter seems odd, I don't think it's impossible. When people stop perceiving themselves and their needs as the center of the universe and instead perceive themselves as a satellite, then it could be possible.

ObfoolRahman wrote: You can’t even think without nature making you think. There is no IFs. No BUTs, period.
Well, one certainly needs the tools. That much can be said. And BTW, all of your no IFs, no BUTs stuff is pointless. It's just you stamping up and down repeating yourself. It's pointless to merely repeat No IFs no BUTs until you demonstrate why. But you haven't successfully done that.
ObfoolRahman wrote: You not being able to understand and say the way I wrote above shows, you are still a fake, half-baked baby atheist, who is in love with his/her Faith on Free Will. You just love to discredit Muslims while guilty of same illogic.
Well, now that I answered exactly what you said, once again this is not true. and, i am not an atheist, so you're even wrong about that. My goodness, you get EVERYTHING wrong.
ObfoolRahman wrote: Philosophy without reason, logic, rationality, and science is fairy tale. Go ahead believe on Santa.
Philosophy is the usage of reason. Philosophy created math and science. Hasn't anybody ever told you this mister accredited scientist??

ObfoolRahman wrote:
Muhammad bin Lyin wrote:Nobody can be sure of that, especially a dogmatic knucklehead such as yourself. What decides to do something with that electrochemical action? When the doctor hits your knee, what is that?? That's a "reflex", right?? No thought given, a pure mechanical and chemical reaction. So according to your point of view, everything we do is a reflex reaction??? Are you sure of that?? I know people who can run scientific rings around you and strangely enough, they're not sure of that.
In science there is nothing 100% guaranteed. But still one explanation is better than other.
Then get rid of your no IF and no BUTs statement please.
ObfoolRahman wrote: 1. Reflex reaction by passes conscious level computing. Reflex action is little computing at the lower than limbic system. Reflex action is just pass through conscious layer.
How do you know that? Let's see your source.
ObfoolRahman wrote: 2. Intuition and subconscious level computation Practice pushes initial conscious level effortful computing (when babies learn to walk, or toddler learning to bike etc.) to the subconscious level. By practice responsibility of future processing is pushed down the subconscious level so that later it can be used directly from the subconscious mind without conscious effort. It frees up the conscious mind for more difficult cognitive tasks. Sub conscious mind is 800 times faster than conscious mind. Intuition originates from subconscious or sometime even from the lower level of limbic system.
And now you are telling me that a reflex in yoiur knee has to do with the subconcious mind?

ObfoolRahman wrote: 3. Cognition-conscious level computing No. Everything we do is not reflex action.
If there is no free will decision making, then of course it is merely a reflex to the stimulus provided. We think we are making a decision and think that are thoughts are decisions, but they really are not, right? it is mere chemical activity that is a reflex to the stimulus provide, right?
ObfoolRahman wrote: When computing takes place in the conscious level it is not reflexive reaction nor intuition.
The computing is a reflex of the stimulus, right?

ObfoolRahman wrote: We are aware of some of the computing results that occur in conscious mind only. We are not aware of the computing that are occurring in the lower level.
Then how can one be certain that it is all deterministic?

ObfoolRahman wrote: Our mind computing and instructing heart to beat faster or slower or make us to breath harder or softer all the time. We are not aware of that. But brain is computing.
First the pre-thought activity starts from the lower level then moves to the higher level. When it gets to the conscious level only then we are aware of that thought, that you call Free Will, choice, or decision. But that choice is already have started a long before you realize it.
What choice?? Choice is free will. Get your story straight, will you?
ObfoolRahman wrote: That is why Free Will is an illusion.
Thought doesn’t affects matter but matter generates thought. A train of “cause of affect” already has departed from your lover level of computation in our body before we are aware of it as thought/free will. Thought is just a passive helpless result of a priory electrochemical action triggered by internal or external events. Thought doesn’t affect matter but the reverse is true.
So the computation is merely a reflex to the stimulus.
ObfoolRahman wrote: Awareness is only a state. A state of brain. Brain functions are purely of matter and energy (electro-chemical) – material world.
Leave mystic bullshiit now.
You don't even know what that is. That's obvious.
ObfoolRahman wrote: You have given up Allah
Allah?? Dumb arss. I haven't even given up God and never had any need to give up Allah because I never followed him in the first place.

Now, step back for a moment and review all of the mistakes you have made on your posts. Look at how you project your qualities onto others. And look at how often you end up being completely wrong when you do this. Just look at it. What does that say about you? What a mess.
ObfoolRahman wrote: Now it is time for you to take the next giant step, give up the false faith on Free Will.
:lol: Boy, you're going to ram this down people's throats if it's the last thing you do. :lol: Fool.
ObfoolRahman wrote: If you have even a bone of intellectual honestly left in your body or brain then you should thank me for this.
:lol:
ObfoolRahman wrote: I did not do cut and paste. I typed it up for you.
I could tell
ObfoolRahman wrote: Understand and then say, “There is no free will, whatsoever. Period.”
ObfoolRahman wrote: In science there is nothing 100% guaranteed.
:crazy:
ObfoolRahman wrote: Can you say that?
Which part of your contradiction would you like me to say? There is no free will, period, or in science there is nothing 100% guaranteed?
ObfoolRahman wrote: And don’t lie to me know.
You have said, that Buddha comes close to it (Free Will)
Yes, I said perhaps.
ObfoolRahman wrote: No. No Budha, no Mohammad, No Jesus, No one in the entire universe, no body, had ever had or have any free will of any sort, ever.
Can you say that?
No because I do not pretend to be certain about things that are not certain, like you do. I'm not that much of a fool, Abdul. Obfool
ObfoolRahman wrote: Nop. You want to maintain your superstition.
You are going to loop around, go around the bushes; play taqya game clearly shows you haven’t understood the story of NO Free Will.
Now there's a very frustrated person. Next you'll start projecting on to me and tell me how frustrated I am, so that your frustration gets hidden.

FOOL
orange jews for breakfast and 20 oz he brews at night

Post Reply