For the sake of argument, let's say God exists

[Doveaman]

You should really take a biology class sometime

If you know so much about biology, then explain to me the physical processes in the brain that produces the human “will”?

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

If you know so much about biology, then explain to me the physical processes in the brain that produces the human “will”?

Define "human will" for me first. I don't want to misrepresent your position.

 

[Doveaman]

Why not do some research yourself. It's only a google away you know.

(I remember reading about this subject in some book on the brain. I haven't got time to google it myself as I'm off home, but brain readings in experimenst can reveal decisions being made 5 or 6 seconds before conscious thought is involved. Maybe someone can find it for me. Once again, it's a fascinating subject, with surprises for both religious and non-religious people.)

Interesting. I think I read this somewhere too.

The thing is, if a decision can be made apart from our being conscious of it in the brain then this suggests that there is more to decision making than just a brain, don’t you think?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Define "human will" for me first. I don't want to misrepresent your position.

Good luck getting him to define his current fuzzword.

 

[Doveaman]

A nuclear weapon is simply an advanced tool. You couldn't make a nuclear weapon. That doesn't make you any less human.

As a human I can learn to make one. Monkeys can’t, and never will. That’s the difference.

You have no evidence for this, no matter what analogy you use. You're just making it up to fit in with a preconceived notion of the nonphysical "will".

Isn’t the evidence obvious? Robots are driven by electricity. Humans are driven by free-will. I can choose not to eat no matter how many neurons are firing in my brain telling me I’m hungry.

There's the fact that hunger, thirst, the desire to stop pain all come from neurons firing in your brain. Why would any other urge or impulse be any different?

Hunger and thirst maybe, but “desire” is of the “will”. This is why I can desire not to stop the pain.

 

[Doveaman]

Where is your evidence that the mind is separate from the body? There are many, many instances in the research where it is clear that altering the brain alters the mind. You can't separate the two.

I’m not trying to separate the brain from the mind. The mind needs a brain. I am simply stating that the human “will” is not generated by the brain, but it works through the brain. So if the brain is altered the “will” is affected.

My point about other organs was that you are perfectly fine in accepting physical explanations for those organs because it is so clearly demonstrated that you'd be considered a fool not to accept them. But the brain...ah...there is some ambiguity there. It's much more abstract. The consensus isn't as clear. We must insert the supernatural there! What's going to happen to your God of the Gaps when brain function gets more conclusively mapped? It will just move to a new gap...just like how God used to be behind the thunder and lightning, used to be in the ocean, and used to be in the stars.

It was predicted that there is a nonphysical element to the human mind/brain, so it’s no surprise scientists can’t figure it out.

“There is a spirit in man...For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.” - Job 32:8, 1 Cor 2:11.

Based on this prediction, such scientific ignorance about the human mind/brain is expected.

Me: there is no evidence of anything beyond the physical
You: PROVE IT!

The human “will”.
You: DISPROVE IT!

This is like asking me to "disprove" God's existence. Why should I have to? You're the one making the claim. All I'm saying is that there is no reason to believe the mind is any different than the body.

Ya think?

You are the one claiming that there MUST be a supernatural "will" tacked on to the physical. Occam's razor is with me on this one - you are the one that is adding extraneous information.

My claim about the nonphysical “will” is not a scientific claim; it’s a theological claim that science is yet to falsify. You falsified “young earth” claim by showing the earth was old. Surely you can do the same with my claim!

 

[Doveaman]

The evidence is that all we ever detect is physical and nothing else.

But you cannot demonstrate that what you detect generates the human “will”. You are blindly assuming.

Now, you're the one making the claim that there is more than meets the eye. Show us evidence that human will is nonphysical.

If it’s nonphysical then what kind of evidence would you expect?

Let’s just say I have a reliable, age-old prediction that there is more to the human mind than just a physical brain:

“There is a spirit in man...For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.” - Job 32:8,1 Cor 2:11.

Based on this prediction we would expect that scientists, who rely on physical observations alone, would not be able to comprehend how the human mind/brain works. And this is exactly what we see; scientists have a much easier time trying to explain an infinite universe than they do trying to explain a little brain in a human head, even though there are so many brains walking around here on earth. They seem to be confirming the prediction.

In fact, show me even a single instance where the nonphysical can verifiably and demonstrably explain anything at all?

The human “will” drives our body through the use of brain power.

This claim is as falsifiable as Noah’s global flood, so why can’t you falsify it? If you are so sure the human “will” is physical then this should be easy enough. Provide the evidence. If not, my claim is a valid as yours, or even more valid since I have an age-old prediction that scientific ignorance about the human mind/brain seems to be confirming.

 

[Nathan Poe]

So, Doveaman, are you going to define "will," or am I right in calling it your fuzzword?

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

I’m not trying to separate the brain from the mind. The mind needs a brain. I am simply stating that the human “will” is not generated by the brain, but it works through the brain. So if the brain is altered the “will” is affected.
It was predicted that there is a nonphysical element to the human mind/brain, so it’s no surprise scientists can’t figure it out.

So basically you've made up a word that is meaningless and by definition cannot be tested and is thus a pointless concept. You're essentially saying the equivalent of "invisible fairies in our heads give us our thoughts."

You're not right. But you're not even wrong. You're not even in the same ballpark as right or wrong.

My claim about the nonphysical “will” is not a scientific claim; it’s a theological claim that science is yet to falsify. You falsified “young earth” claim by showing the earth was old. Surely you can do the same with my claim!

If it's not a scientific claim, it cannot be falsified. End of discussion. Creationism is nonscientific, and cannot be falsified, but certain claims of creationism are scientific claims...like stating that the earth is 6,000 years old. That has been refuted, but creationism as a whole, because it is unscientific to begin with, cannot be "refuted" because it cannot be falsified. It is completely unscientific. But the claim that the earth is 6,000 years old is a scientific claim, and thus it can be refuted.

Your concept of the "will" is also completely unscientific, thus you cannot "disprove" it. It's basically just some idea you made up.

Like I said, you should take a science class. You clearly do not understand what science is.

 

[Ar Cosc]

As a human I can learn to make one. Monkeys can’t, and never will. That’s the difference.

The difference is you have a bigger brain, which can develop more complex tools. A nuclear weapon is just a more advanced manifestation of a chimpanzee using rudimentary wooden weapons to hunt, as they have been observed to do: BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Chimpanzees 'hunt using spears'

That humans have bigger brains is an observed fact, but it's not evidence that there's something supernatural going on in the background that's not also going on to a lesser degree in other animals who make tools.

Isn’t the evidence obvious? Robots are driven by electricity. Humans are driven by free-will. I can choose not to eat no matter how many neurons are firing in my brain telling me I’m hungry.

But you also have other neurons firing in your brain telling you not to eat, for whatever evolutionary reason. There's a shortage of food, you are overweight, or you're trying to prove a religious point. If you're hooked up to an EEG machine, we can look at the brain activity that triggers this. And we can affect the "will" to perform actions with various chemical and electrical stimulation. If the will is nonphysical, then why can it be changed by taking very physical things like antidepressants, marijuana, alcohol, or LSD?

Hunger and thirst maybe, but “desire” is of the “will”. This is why I can desire not to stop the pain.

See above.

 

[Doveaman]

Define "human will" for me first. I don't want to misrepresent your position.

The human “will” has to do with our wants and desires and the choices we freely make to fulfill those wants and desires.

 

[Nathan Poe]

The human “will” has to do with our wants and desires and the choices we freely make to fulfill those wants and desires.

He didn't ask what it "has to do with," he asked what it is.

This is a simple question.

 

[Doveaman]

He didn't ask what it "has to do with," he asked what it is.

This is a simple question.

It is our wants and desires and the choices we freely make to fulfill those wants and desires.

 

[Ar Cosc]

It is our wants and desires and the choices we freely make to fulfill those wants and desires.

Well, the wants and desires are easily explained by the reaction our body has to certain stimuli. Whether that's hunger, thirst, sexual arousal, or the chemicals associated with the memory of a good or bad experience. The choices and decisions are made by the neurons firing in such as way as to weigh up the options, access any relevant knowledge and memories, and processing all of that. Our evidence? Well, if all the decision making processes are outsourced to some sort of nonphysical "will", why fire the neurons during the decision making process at all? Why fire them in a characteristic pattern, in centres of the brain that would have little function other than to process information for making decisions?

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

It is our wants and desires and the choices we freely make to fulfill those wants and desires.

Ar Cosc nailed it. Wants and desires are pretty easy to explain neurologically. The brain is a complicated fact-checking circuit; it sorts out the basal needs and cycles through the stored information in an attempt to secure those needs.

There is no mystical reason why we desire water, for example. We have receptors in our kidneys that tell the brain the status of the blood volume. If it's low, the brain turns on the thirst center. There is also no mystical human "will" that keeps our heart pumping or our lungs functioning. Afferent and efferent arms of the circuit keep everything in an optimal range when in health.

Virtually everything in the nervous system can be explained by reflexes. Some are extremely complicated. Some are extremely simple. But there is no evidence or need to outsource any of this.

 

[Hespera]

The manufacturers do.
The Manufacturer does.
Only of it’s false.
At least you are willing to admit the possibility of something nonphysical. Not many others do.
Do I?
I suppose you would like me to deny God being a true fact too, right? Sorry.

The manufacturers do.

No, nobody understand all there is to know about it, the manufacturersa among the least so. The physicists would know better than to say they understand all about electricity. Cant you just accept that point, that there are mysteries about physics? Probably not, if a evil evo said it.

The Manufacturer does.

Such an av-worthy quip do you have a rule against just accepting something as true, like, that nobody knows much about how the brain works?

Only of it’s false

Another lame quip. but if you think you are infallible and all you toss out is true, then i guess you will be fine just saying whatever comes to mind, pretned its true, and be content.

I suppose you would like me to deny God being a true fact too, right? Sorry

Wrong again. You have the most remarkable ability to miss the mark and come to weird conclusions. even on the simple things. Think what it must do for your "theology" and grasp of matters seientific. If you can.

 

[sandwiches]

But you cannot demonstrate that what you detect generates the human “will”. You are blindly assuming.

I am assuming but not blindingly. We've never seen anything nonphysical. Do you know of a reason why we should think there's more to the universe than what what can be detected?

If it’s nonphysical then what kind of evidence would you expect?

I'm not going to do your homework. You made the claim, you provide the evidence.

Let’s just say I have a reliable, age-old prediction that there is more to the human mind than just a physical brain:

“There is a spirit in man...For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.” - Job 32:8,1 Cor 2:11.

What did it predict and how can we verify this?

Based on this prediction we would expect that scientists, who rely on physical observations alone, would not be able to comprehend how the human mind/brain works. And this is exactly what we see; scientists have a much easier time trying to explain an infinite universe than they do trying to explain a little brain in a human head, even though there are so many brains walking around here on earth. They seem to be confirming the prediction.

You're wrong. That quote talks about psychic abilities.

The human “will” drives our body through the use of brain power.

This claim is as falsifiable as Noah’s global flood, so why can’t you falsify it? If you are so sure the human “will” is physical then this should be easy enough. Provide the evidence. If not, my claim is a valid as yours, or even more valid since I have an age-old prediction that scientific ignorance about the human mind/brain seems to be confirming.

First you need to tell us how you verified it, how it can be demonstrated, and what your data showed regarding the nonphysical nature of the human will. Once you provide that, we can work toward seeing how it can be falsified.

 

[Greg1234]

Well, the wants and desires are easily explained by the reaction our body has to certain stimuli. Whether that's hunger, thirst, sexual arousal, or the chemicals associated with the memory of a good or bad experience.

These are instinctual, programmed drives of the physical mind highlighted through external stimuli in a physical environment. Even if I am thirsty and want to drink water, this can be easily overridden by a desire to not want to drink. And such a desire can be fulfilled. The sole desire to drink water when thirst erupts or the inability to defy such would be a demonstration of a lack of free will.

The same with responses to the environs at hand. Purely physical stimuli in a physical world will engage the desire for purely material constructs and the fulfillment of such is purely instinctual, where the will to oppose or act in defiance of that desire is weakened or inevitably vanquished.

 

[Tomatoman]

These are instinctual, programmed drives of the physical mind highlighted through external stimuli in a physical environment. Even if I am thirsty and want to drink water, this can be easily overridden by a desire to not want to drink. And such a desire can be fulfilled. The sole desire to drink water when thirst erupts or the inability to defy such would be a demonstration of a lack of free will.

The same with responses to the environs at hand. Purely physical stimuli in a physical world will engage the desire for purely material constructs and the fulfillment of such is purely instinctual, where the will to oppose or act in defiance of that desire is weakened or inevitably vanquished.

You'll find most of your thoughts are directly or indirectly related to social status, sex and the satisfaction of physical needs and appetites.

This is because you are the product of 3.5 billion years of evolution. your body and mind are geared towards you surviving long enough and being fit enough to pass on your genes. Your conscious mind isn't always aware of the evolutionary impulses that the subconscious is driving you towards, but the basic drives in you are evolutionary.

 

[HosannaHM]

But Im glad to hear you do read what I say.

Earlier you had some ideas about noahs ark, i responded and you never let me know if you saw it, understood it, or had questions.

Im not looking to get people to "admit they are wrong" at least not in principle, tho when im right and they are wrong, it would be nice if i felt like i got thru and they could see it. You have some odd ideas about biology and geology, and I would be interested to see if you would be willing to learn where your ideas are off.

I'm acknowledging your points

Sorry just been thinking a lot and this thread is a bit more interesting right now.

But I gladly accept any insight you may have from your view of creation/evolution