Are we designed? How you could design a consciousness being? You see, design should be prior to creation since you get nothing if you have no design. But a thing cannot be free in another word conscious once you design it.Somehow you exist so yes it is…whether that’s God or the universe or biology, you are conscious and thus it is possible.
Why not?Are we designed? How you could design a consciousness being? You see, design should be prior to creation since you get nothing if you have no design. But a thing cannot be free in another word conscious once you design it.
It still serves as an example of something being created with an intended purpose, but yet someone has the free will to use it for a purpose other than that which was intended. I thought your assertion was that such a thing is not possible? Numerous examples have been provided here by many. If I may be blunt, you seem to lack the intellect to consider answers to the very questions you ask. You quickly dismiss every example as a nonsequitur because the person providing the example is not a deity. The fact that I can’t create a conscious being is a non-starter. I already know that I am not God. I never asserted such a thing. You refusing to consider my point on such grounds appears a simple deflection, from my perspective.Is it possible to create a conscious being? Your example of book does not entail as a good example.
I think what Bahman means is that the book itself doesn’t have free will, it can’t do anything by itself but has to be acted upon.It still serves as an example of something being created with an intended purpose, but yet someone has the free will to use it for a purpose other than that which was intended. I thought your assertion was that such a thing is not possible?
You are putting limiting factors on this that create a false dilemma.Are we designed? How you could design a consciousness being?.
Wrong - As I have already expressed, If “Free” is part of the design parameters then there really is no conflict.You see, design should be prior to creation since you get nothing if you have no design. But a thing cannot be free in another word conscious once you design it
True, but not all parts of God’s creation have free will either. In my example, the “reader” of the book has free will to either use it for its intended purpose or otherwise. The fact that the book does not have free will is immaterial, I believe. Mountains are part of God’s creation, but nobody here is arguing whether or not they have free will. The people God has created have free will, but not everything created by God does. That was the point I was trying to make.I think what Bahman means is that the book itself doesn’t have free will, it can’t do anything by itself but has to be acted upon.
How about consciousness? Is it designed also? How you could design consciousness hence free will?All of them: purpose, planning, and intention
Once makes a design with purpose of mind, for a purpose, with a plan and with intention to carry out the plan.
If the answer to your question here is “I don’t know.” Does that preclude it from being possible?How about consciousness? Is it designed also? How you could design consciousness hence free will?
Does exist a body of knowledge that intelligent design, in this case free will, work upon? Yes or no?I do not see any conflict between these two definitions as given…
If the “specific function” and “desired (design) output” IS the “ability to freely choose after realizing options”…then all is in harmony. There is no conflict.
Free will is output of a design! Don’t you see a problem here? Since what is designed by definition that we agreed has some functioning, meaning that there exist a unique decision given options. How we could be free if the outcome is uniquely defined? What is the use of consciousness?It appears that your problem is that you simply have not considered that a designer might WANT and INTEND “Free Will” to be a desired output of a design.
Hope this helps to resolve your dilemma.
Peace
James
The ability to freely decide cannot be possibly be a specific function, since a specific function uniquely determines outcome given (name removed by moderator)uts. (name removed by moderator)ut in this case is the body of the knowledge that system should work upon once it is in the place you have no freedom, since that is the body of knowledge which dictate how system should work. What other thing you could consider rather than knowledge, to make the system work at the same time grants freedom?Why not?
As JRKH said "if the “specific function” and “desired (design) output” IS the “ability to freely choose after realizing options”.
We are at an impasse here. I assert that consciousness was created with free will, you assert it cannot be. My argument is that an omnipotent God has created it this way, you have not yet presented any argument for your assertion.How about consciousness? Is it designed also? How you could design consciousness hence free will?
I didn’t mean literal you. You in general, for example a deity.You are putting limiting factors on this that create a false dilemma.
You ask “Could you (meaning one of us posters) design a conscious being?”
The obvious answer is no we could not. But because we cannot does not mean it cannot be done.
I cannot design a computer…but obviously others can.
Your question is not about whether WE can do this - but whether or not it can be logically done.
Are you serious with what stated in the bold part?Wrong - As I have already expressed, **If “Free” is part of the design parameters then there really is no conflict. **
Peace
James
I assume “Yes”.Does exist a body of knowledge that intelligent design, in this case free will, work upon? Yes or no?
Nope. Why should I?Free will is output of a design! Don’t you see a problem here?
First of all - please recognize that my initial answer was to your initial questions. That is - - there is no conflict between the statements you made.Since what is designed by definition that we agreed has some functioning, meaning that there exist a unique decision given options. How we could be free if the outcome is uniquely defined? What is the use of consciousness?
So, you want to put a logically impossible act on the shoulders of God? I am arguing that it is logically impossible act because there exist a tension between design and freedom. Once a system is fully designed to the last digit to perform a function then it is no free, otherwise the system is ill-defined.If the answer to your question here is “I don’t know.” Does that preclude it from being possible?
Peace
James
What was needed is omniscience. Omniscience by definition is the knowledge of everything yet knowledge is a utility of consciousness hence one cannot create consciousness using knowledge.We are at an impasse here. I assert that consciousness was created with free will, you assert it cannot be. My argument is that an omnipotent God has created it this way, you have not yet presented any argument for your assertion.
Sorry - but we cannot respond to what you “mean” if what you mean is not clearly expressed.I didn’t mean literal you. You in general, for example a deity.
Why would you think I was not serious?Are you serious with what stated in the bold part?
Ok, then here you go:I assume “Yes”.
Do I know what this body of knowledge is? No…
Does my lack of knowledge preclude it’s existence? No…
Nope. Why should I?
First of all - please recognize that my initial answer was to your initial questions. That is - - there is no conflict between the statements you made.
Now one can (as you have done) ask why and how a designer might choose to do what is proposed in the OP…but that is secondary to the question of whether it is possible. It is indeed possible.
OK - - to reply to your questions above.
Someone cuts me off in traffic. I am “designed” with two very basic options. I can get angry or not get angry…I have free will to choose which one…Further - I have many variations of choice that stem from these very basic binary choices. I can not become angry, but still be upset. I can just let it pass and add a prayer for that person.
Consciousness is what actually ALLOWS me to choose. Without the conscious will, I would act instinctively - that is - without free will.
Again - no conflict.
Peace
James
I don’t understand why you create these parameters that are arbitrary and inaccurate.Are we designed? How you could design a consciousness being? You see, design should be prior to creation since you get nothing if you have no design. But a thing cannot be free in another word conscious once you design it.
Omniscience is not necessary to create something, what is required is just enough knowledge to create it. The creator doesn’t need to know how the creation will act. (Please note that I am not saying God is not indeed omniscient.)What was needed is omniscience. Omniscience by definition is the knowledge of everything
Correction: one cannot create using only knowledge; one also needs the power to create.yet knowledge is a utility of consciousness hence one cannot create consciousness using knowledge.
Try this on,Ok, then here you go:
- God is omniscient
- Omniscience is the knowledge of everything
- Knowledge however is a utility of consciousness
- This means that knowledge cannot be used as a tool to create consciousness
- The act creation of conscious being based on knowledge is logically impossible