There is no need for soul to explain free will

[Linusthe2nd]

First paragraph true, the previously mentioned by fellow member Gary,

‘So its still argued that consciousness is influenced by other parts of the mind such as intuition thus free will’.

In keeping with GEddie above, I believe true as well, & intuition is only a suggestion, a mini waking dream of sorts , so in the translation of , can be distorted. A flash suggestion due to the ongoing intake of information into the unconscious and things to do with organizing and classifying information alongside conscious “impressions” True, the effect demonstrates conscious free will , association and a relationship.

Well, we have tried reasoning and that doesn’t work. So I will just state that the Catholic Church teaches that God created man in his image and likeness, that is he gave him a soul as the form of the body and the soul has, among all its properties, those of intellect and will, and that man’s will is free to choose any way he may like. Of course these teachings are challenged by some here and by the secular world generally, if indeed, it ever gives it a thought. That does not matter, we do not have to justify or beliefs to anyone. Because, no matter what we say, most of the world will not believe, that is the world’s loss. So, take it or leave it…

Linus2nd

 

[orang]

Well, we have tried reasoning and that doesn’t work. So I will just state that the Catholic Church teaches that God created man in his image and likeness, that is he gave him a soul as the form of the body and the soul has, among all its properties, those of intellect and will, and that man’s will is free to choose any way he may like. Of course these teachings are challenged by some here and by the secular world generally, if indeed, it ever gives it a thought. That does not matter, we do not have to justify or beliefs to anyone. Because, no matter what we say, most of the world will not believe, that is the world’s loss. So, take it or leave it…

Linus2nd

Nothing in this thread or anything about exploring the topic and subject has anything to do with contradicting church teachings but compliments. Plus many people couldn’t care less about what the world thinks and have a natural & fear-less interest in how things work.

I don’t know how it could be said , Well, weve tried reasoning *when the learning was explained about the colors in reply, to the confused entry.

 

[orang]

1. What we call physical is an approximation of reality. It comes from a close look at subject matter ignoring the effect of the whole with the outcome so called laws of nature. There is no set of laws that can grasp the effect of the whole hence the reality at the edge is not physical.
2. The memory is what is left from experiencing an event so called consciousness. The consciousness itself is the awareness from state of existence hence it is related to the whole subject matter. Thus, memory cannot be physical.
3. The action is the result of reflection of our collective memory when dealing with an new subject matter, so called free will.

The problem with above proposal, if there is no soul, free will would then require something to be subject to

for example… where attributes of character such as genuineness are concerned.

 

[orang]

Nothing in this thread or anything about exploring the topic and subject has anything to do with contradicting church teachings but compliments. Plus many people couldn’t care less about what the world thinks and have a natural & fear-less interest in how things work.

I don’t know how it could be said , Well, weve tried reasoning *when the learning was explained about the colors in reply, to the entry.

 

[Bahman]

The problem with above proposal, if there is no soul, free will would then require something to be subject to

for example… where attributes of character such as genuineness are concerned.

Everything is mind and memory (any attribute you wish, can be assigned to it) is its form.

 

[orang]

Everything is mind and memory (any attribute you wish, can be assigned to it) is its form.

Oh I donno,

the problem is people cannot assign the wholesome genuine character when they wish

for example,

ever meet a car salesman trying to assign an honesty deep down to his manner and faking it ? The problem here if so, the idea eliminates for a way of distinguishing human character as something real, on something other then a convenient whim.

 

[Bahman]

Please justify 3). It appears to be a false claim, making the logic unsound. It certainly does not follow from 1) and 2).

No it does not follow from 1) and 2). This statement, “when you know how a system works then its duty is reduced to simple functioning” is a self-statement. It is easy to understand why it is correct statement based on three facts, first, by functioning we mean that we know what would be the output of system considering given (name removed by moderator)ut, second, by know we mean that the functioning is known and finally, third, by how we mean that we exactly expect a known response from a system in any circumstances knowing what the system is built of. As you see functioning is lower than knowing how as in functioning you only know what is the output of system given an (name removed by moderator)ut whereas in the second case you have the knowledge of how hence you exactly expect an output given an (name removed by moderator)ut, on top of that you can do your own design. Simply knowing how means that you know what we expect hence system solely functions, being a pure robot.

 

[Bahman]

Thanks, of course man knows basically what the function of the unconscious mind is all about,

because man knows its ability to classify, store and organize every single experience and understanding.

Correct but not completely. The subconscious mind classify, store and organize any single experience and react based on these but we can never know how for two strong reasons, first, our action is not a simple functioning, second, no system can know how the system itself works since it can never perform a complete self projection without changing the state of affair, in another word the knowledge about the system is always one step behind the current state of being of the system.

 

[orang]

Correct but not completely. The subconscious mind classify, store and organize any single experience and react based on these but we can never know how for two strong reasons, first, our action is not a simple functioning, second, no system can know how the system itself works since it can never perform a complete self projection without changing the state of affair, in another word the knowledge about the system is always one step behind the current state of being of the system.

Okay, so we have sub-conscious and we have conscious mind, can you give a small example of an event and what is happening , so it can be seen how it is understood in the explaining.

For example above says our acts are not simple functioning, so a fictitious example of how it is understood might be a good way to get at the idea.

 

[Bahman]

Okay, so we have sub-conscious and we have conscious mind, can you give a small example of an event and what is happening , so it can be seen how it is understood in the explaining.

For example above says our acts are not simple functioning, so a fictitious example of how it is understood might be a good way to get at the idea.

It is very simple but lets see what do we mean with functioning and what is a pure robot. We call a system as pure robot if and only if we exactly know what would be the reaction of the system, lets call it R, given a certain stimulus, lets call it S. This means that exist a set of S lest call it SS in which SS={S1, S2,…} which corresponds to SR={R1, R2, …}. This define the system/perfect robot. By function, we mean that we know that for specific stimulus S* there exists a response R*.

A perfect robot however cannot learn since its state of affair is defined hence it cannot change or learn since the act learning means that above set has to change which is contrary to what we define as a pure robot. Whether a pure robot exist or no is subject of other discussion.

Now another step. We learn so we are not a pure robot. Now assume that you perform an experiment on a agent/ourselves trying to guess what would be our reaction to a given stimulus. Lets assume that there exist a SS1 and SR1 prior to experiment but we are not aware of them. We in fact planing to perform the experiment to know what are SS1 and SR1. Unfortunately/fortunately the state of affair changes once the experiment is done if the agent learn something from experiment which is always true. This means that those set changes to SS2 and SR2 once we perform our experiment. You know what are SS1 and SR1 but they are useless since the agent this time function based on SS2 and SR2 rather than SS1 and SR1.

This means that we are always one step behind of the pure reality/the absolute truth no matter how hard we try.

What this has to do with free will? An pure robot has a will but it is not free since those sets are defined. An agent is free since those sets are undefined. The freedom of will of course comes with the price of ignorance, the fact that we don’t know how we exactly perform an action since those sets are undefined.

 

[GaryTaylor]

But… the animals, the poor cats and dogs are still scratching at the doors. They haven’t figured out how to build a fire to keep warm and thank God for the food.

Why is it no animals worship and pray, certainly there is something different here?

 

[Linusthe2nd]

The proper title to this thread should be, " Is it any wonder that the world is so confused? "

Linus2nd

 

[Bahman]

But… the animals, the poor cats and dogs are still scratching at the doors. They haven’t figured out how to build a fire to keep warm and thank God for the food.

Animal can learn to great extend. Look at wild life and see how they manage to survive under such a hard wild situation.

Why is it no animals worship and pray, certainly there is something different here?

We don’t know whether animal knows the concept of God or not. The concept of God could be totally an artifact of human intellect. Something that we cannot prove or disprove. That means that we might be cognitively close to concept, we cannot claim that we know God until a clear proof that everybody agrees upon is provided.

 

[Bahman]

The proper title to this thread should be, " Is it any wonder that the world is so confused? "

Linus2nd

I rather stay in state of doubt and confusion which is the door to knowledge than believing on something which are not based on facts.

 

[orang]

Free will does not depend upon the unconscious.

ICXC NIKA

The problem is above implies without unconscious mind , there would be no impairment of attribute free will, which would be pretty difficult to demonstrate. For example the unconscious mind contributes a great deal to the operations and is always participating. A rough theory mind and soul may be difficult to begin shaping out.

 

[orang]

Bahman;

It is very simple but lets see what do we mean with functioning and what is a pure robot. We call a system as pure robot if and only if we exactly know what would be the reaction of the system, lets call it R, given a certain stimulus, lets call it S. This means that exist a set of S lest call it SS in which SS={S1, S2,…} which corresponds to SR={R1, R2, …}. This define the system/perfect robot. By function, we mean that we know that for specific stimulus S* there exists a response R*.

orang :

We can give greater attributes to the robot and the robots experience.

If we watch the robot for many days & months …some of the wiring or mechanics will become less efficient.

The robot will adapt to change and be unable to do the job properly .

Baham :

A perfect robot however cannot learn since its state of affair is defined hence it cannot change or learn since the act learning means that above set has to change which is contrary to what we define as a pure robot. Whether a pure robot exist or no is subject of other discussion.

orang :

The robot indeed change’s, The state of affair’s cannot do anything but change, there is no escape for the robot but to adapt in its order of ability with change .

Baham :

Now another step. We learn so we are not a pure robot. Now assume that you perform an experiment on a agent/ourselves trying to guess what would be our reaction to a given stimulus. Lets assume that there exist a SS1 and SR1 prior to experiment but we are not aware of them. We in fact planing to perform the experiment to know what are SS1 and SR1. Unfortunately/fortunately the state of affair changes once the experiment is done if the agent learn something from experiment which is always true. This means that those set changes to SS2 and SR2 once we perform our experiment. You know what are SS1 and SR1 but they are useless since the agent this time function based on SS2 and SR2 rather than SS1 and SR1.

This means that we are always one step behind of the pure reality/the absolute truth no matter how hard we try.

orang :

the problem with saying we are always one step behind pure reality in the example, is the example for the experiment includes things from the future. To know what the future is would be above and superior to time, to see through a window. So this would be a power above biological existence. ( time) Biological existence is subject to time. The concept introduces another imaginary world which we do not exist in. So what findings may be as far as being at a step behind, belong to that world.

Baham:

What this has to do with free will? An pure robot has a will but it is not free since those sets are defined. An agent is free since those sets are undefined. The freedom of will of course comes with the price of ignorance, the fact that we don’t know how we exactly perform an action since those sets are undefined.

orang :

as shown above the sets are not defined and must comply with the laws in the existing universe where the robot has its experience.

the robot is free to change…it is free to adapt to change and will change according to its ability, relative to the changing world the robot has the experience.