He most definately is. Lot of pseudo-intelligent contradicory babble, no real discourse, condescending persona, etc.
Definately an example of pflap scrambling somebody's eggs. He simply cannot have his "postulates" challenged on any level cause that shuts him down to the point of assuming passive-aggressive tactics. He has very strong defense mechanisms that usually result in projecting out onto other member posting here. At this point nobody else can understand mike but mike - if hes challenged he reiterates that we just dont get it. What he doesn't get is his content is rather remidial and when he is queried he then resorts to insults, insinuating everyone here is stupid and can't keep up.
No. I explained this in my chapter 6, which was not posted in total, and spread out a little big. Two big chunks can be found on Page17, at the 45 % mark, and page 15, at 70%.
It is one PATTERN of determinism that can be replace or overpower another PATTERN of determinism.
For a simple lever, the pattern of determinism that is unacceptable is the heaviness of a rock that is too much for our muscles to budge. The pattern of determinism that we find acceptable is moving the long lever arm a long distance, in order to get the rock to move a short distance.
> Your answer still implies there’s an external force/influence OUTSIDE BOTH PATTERNS of determinism that is the agency to do the replacing or operating the lever.
> Please don’t include me when you say “The pattern of determinism that WE find acceptable” – which suggests I have agreed to the dubious intellectual standards that you hold to
I am glad to see that you are reading the early chapters of my theory. Thank you. That was a good question. I will remember to be more clear when re-writing that section, that it is not anything OUTSIDE determinism, but within.
I’ve followed this thread and have read your chapters…maybe your happy JUST BECAUSEyou’re getting some attention – AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A RE-WRITE OR REVISING FOR CLARITY OR CORRECTING THE CONTRADICTIONS…It seems to me YOUR SIDEof the discussion is more representative of a person who wants the thread to be about YOURSELF than anything that even remotely resembles the Socratic method of getting to the essentials of a topic... think I can count on you to be quintessentially off-topic.
I have refrained from asking a lot of questions because of the unsatisfactory manner in which you respond to pointed questions – you flat out don’t – and usually respond with more nonsense that does not answer the question – or you dodge, ignore, etc.,
Instead YOU act the part of a troll to get waaaaaaay off-topic, refuse to acknowledge anecdotal evidence presented by posters, being dismissive and condescending, and respond in ways that suggest you are oblivious to the logic and valid points Grease Spotters have raised to rebut your “theories
Edited by T-Bone the editor was determined to have free association with typos
I have multiple answers to that. I believe free will is part of our cognitive abilities that has a supernatural origin– we were created in the image and likeness of God. I also believe humankind never lost the image and likeness of God – although according to Scripture that image and likeness is tarnished – i.e., damaged – our sinful nature. I believe free will is a capability everyone has and for the Christian it means choosing the options mentioned in passages likeRomans 7and Romans 8to deal effectively / productively with our sinful nature.
Or do you think free will is natural, and science (if it is smart enough) can explain it, or at least parts of it?
I think it is natural and explainable by science someday.
But now I have to go back and see the context. It has something to do with the softballs not being padding, but to make it more comfortable. I am remembering more as I type.
First off, I was addressing the softballs and the slightly uncomfortable item to everyone, not just you. I think that is why I dismissed this as too complicated to get into and moved on. I concede that may have looked like a dodge, but I was just prioritizing what other responses I had to type out, and avoided it. I am addressing it now for your sake.
Before I go back to check the context, I can say this about the comfortableness.
Yes, I admit that I was uncomfortable about changing from "free will is supernatural" to "free will is natural" about 9 years ago. I have already admitted that about 3 other times on this thread.
I have noticed over the years that MANY things about free will make people uncomfortable, and I have mentioned that several times here.
One of the big things that makes people uncomfortable is that maybe we aren't so wonderful and glorious after all. Francis Crick called facing this idea ASTONISHING, that we are natural and physical, and our brains and minds are not at all supernatural. I am calling the same idea UNCOMFORTABLE to lots of people. I was just guessing if you found it uncomfortable to think of free will as natural.
And now we are full circle.
I am less dense.
You have your answer. I was not projecting; just making an educated guess that you, too, would be uncomfortable with the statement that free will is ONLY a natural phenomenon.
I have not mentioned this lately, but last year I had 4 eye surgeries. Right now I have massive muscle co-ordination problems that force me to squint one eye or wear an eyepatch to read with my best eye.
I also have lost 80% of my peripheral vision to glaucoma, with blind spots that necessitate my "roving" over a scene or a screen to see everything.
It was the case that I did not see your question well enough when I went back to look this morning.
But now I have to go back and see the context. It has something to do with the softballs not being padding, but to make it more comfortable. I am remembering more as I type.
First off, I was addressing the softballs and the slightly uncomfortable item to everyone, not just you.
I think that is why I dismissed this as too complicated to get into and moved on. I concede that may have looked like a dodge, but I was just prioritizing what other responses I had to type out, and avoided it. I am addressing it now for your sake.
Before I go back to check the context, I can say this about the comfortableness.
Yes, I admit that I was uncomfortable about changing from "free will is supernatural" to "free will is natural" about 9 years ago. I have already admitted that about 3 other times on this thread.
I have noticed over the years that MANY things about free will make people uncomfortable, and I have mentioned that several times here.
Francis Crick called facing this idea ASTONISHING, that we are natural and physical, and our brains and minds are not at all supernatural. I am calling the same idea UNCOMFORTABLE to lots of people. I was just guessing if you found it uncomfortable to think of free will as natural.
If one can NUDGE a robot that is considered remote control. What a stupid metaphor!
Now you have a mishmash of mixed up metaphors: installing software into gears, levers, fluids, bones, etc…I guess you are talking about programs and other operating information used by a computer – software as opposed to hardware… and you assume love – which is to be brief, an intense feeling of deep affection, a great interest and pleasure in something, feeling a deep affection for someone or something – can be reduced to a series of coded software instructions to control the operation of a computer or other machine….yeeech ! there is NOTHING – NOTHING - NOTHING “genuinely special” about that...this love is not genuine - nor special - it's preprogrammed
When I walk into a situation that involves simple ethics, my instantaneous response is going to be 100% robotic, and fully determined by the brain synapses with which I carry into it.
Physical determinism dictates that I have NO ability or freedom to act otherwise; only what my prior settings dictate my response to be in this situation. It’s like a knee-jerk reflex, only many small such reflexes smoothly joined to produce smooth robotic motion.
This is not freedom. Being stuck at the stoplight on the small motorcycle is analogous to being stuck in this kind of robotic performance. Suppose, in this ethics situation, I was unprepared for the complexities and I fumbled my response in some way. My prior synapse settings failed me!That is life.
However, I am able to observe my inappropriate (robotic) response to the situation, and realize that it did not go according to my wishes. I had previous expectations as to how I ought to act in such a situation, and I am unhappy with my performance. I failed to act according to my expectations, my creed, my principles, my training.
Our greatest freedom is the ability to choose a response!
Freedom of the mind requires not only, or not even specially, the absence of legal constraints but the presence of alternative thoughts. The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities..... Allan Bloom... The Closing of the American Mind
Edited by T-Bone editor-in-chief of all that is Bull-Shonta
(2) better medical treatments for some mental illnesses, and
(3) clearing the muddy waters regarding personal responsibility.
I see (3) as a raging need in all levels of society, and for people of almost every IQ level, as well as for the justice system and institutions of education.
I have not mentioned this lately, but last year I had 4 eye surgeries. Right now I have massive muscle co-ordination problems that force me to squint one eye or wear an eyepatch to read with my best eye.
We have the freedom of will in minFW to nudge our robot lives towards love, over and over, RIGHT!Isn’t that more important than what kinds of gears, levers, fluids, bones, carbon, etc. into which we install our Love Software? It’s not what we are, it’s what we DO that really matters.
Not so fast! I thought it was what we BELEEEVED that mattered.
We were taught by T7TMOG that what we DO only matters if we BELIEVE it does.
So many of us didn't ABSORB the material the first time. It's time to get back to the originals and relearn what was taught by closing our minds to confirm our bias.
I did not project it on you, but only guessed it on to you, mainly because so many others are uncomfortable about free will being natural. I have interviewed a lot of people about this over the years. I wrote of this in my book chapters.
My discomfort at the notion of free will being natural INTENSE when I first faced it in High School. But a lot of that discomfort subsided and was turned to a fascination when I got into the Bible about 4 years later. I vaguely remember the discomfort to be a threat to my Roman Catholic faith or attempt to have faith. It was like, "If there is no free will, then maybe there is no God!" and that was very uncomfortable to me.
Late edit: add to this the discomfort I had 9 years ago when I switched from spiritual free will to natural free will. That was pretty intense discomfort also, but it subsided pretty fast, after the novelty wore off.
I did not project it on you, but only guessed it on to you, mainly because so many others are uncomfortable about free will being natural. I have interviewed a lot of people about this over the years. I wrote of this in my book chapters.
My discomfort at the notion of free will being natural INTENSE when I first faced it in High School. But a lot of that discomfort subsided and was turned to a fascination when I got into the Bible about 4 years later. I vaguely remember the discomfort to be a threat to my Roman Catholic faith or attempt to have faith. It was like, "If there is no free will, then maybe there is no God!" and that was very uncomfortable to me.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
330
267
271
186
Popular Days
Nov 12
118
Nov 13
107
Nov 20
105
Nov 9
104
Top Posters In This Topic
Mike 330 posts
T-Bone 267 posts
OldSkool 271 posts
Nathan_Jr 186 posts
Popular Days
Nov 12 2022
118 posts
Nov 13 2022
107 posts
Nov 20 2022
105 posts
Nov 9 2022
104 posts
Popular Posts
OldSkool
I do want to address this Mike. You constantly come at me like I have forgotten, or have been talked out of the truth of wierwille, or that I just don't understand where you are coming from. Personall
waysider
This right here. If you're unable to define and regulate your control factors and variables, your research is worthless. The best you could hope for would be an observational analysis of your collecte
Charity
I agree with So_Crates when he said "Here's a wild idea: why don't YOU become meek and I'll tell you about all the fruit in my life since I stopped making PLAF the center of my life." There have
Posted Images
Mike
Believe me, I do WANT to answer him.
Maybe you can tell me what I am dodging?
I can't get So_crates to tell me what I am dodging.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Why is it everyone gets it but you?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I plead "too dense."
I looked at your last several posts and can't find what you are talking about.
When you enlighten with some fresh text on it, I may be less dense about it, and answer you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Right! It's all trolling tactics.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
You apparently didn't look very hard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
I'm beginning to think he is a troll.
An example of what PLAF can do for you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
He most definately is. Lot of pseudo-intelligent contradicory babble, no real discourse, condescending persona, etc.
Definately an example of pflap scrambling somebody's eggs. He simply cannot have his "postulates" challenged on any level cause that shuts him down to the point of assuming passive-aggressive tactics. He has very strong defense mechanisms that usually result in projecting out onto other member posting here. At this point nobody else can understand mike but mike - if hes challenged he reiterates that we just dont get it. What he doesn't get is his content is rather remidial and when he is queried he then resorts to insults, insinuating everyone here is stupid and can't keep up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
> Your answer still implies there’s an external force/influence OUTSIDE BOTH PATTERNS of determinism that is the agency to do the replacing or operating the lever.
> Please don’t include me when you say “The pattern of determinism that WE find acceptable” – which suggests I have agreed to the dubious intellectual standards that you hold to
I’ve followed this thread and have read your chapters…maybe your happy JUST BECAUSE you’re getting some attention – AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH A RE-WRITE OR REVISING FOR CLARITY OR CORRECTING THE CONTRADICTIONS…It seems to me YOUR SIDE of the discussion is more representative of a person who wants the thread to be about YOURSELF than anything that even remotely resembles the Socratic method of getting to the essentials of a topic...
think I can count on you to be quintessentially off-topic.
I have refrained from asking a lot of questions because of the unsatisfactory manner in which you respond to pointed questions – you flat out don’t – and usually respond with more nonsense that does not answer the question – or you dodge, ignore, etc.,
Instead YOU act the part of a troll to get waaaaaaay off-topic, refuse to acknowledge anecdotal evidence presented by posters, being dismissive and condescending, and respond in ways that suggest you are oblivious to the logic and valid points Grease Spotters have raised to rebut your “theories
Edited by T-Bonethe editor was determined to have free association with typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Please specify the issue…there’s more than one problem being addressed right now
I think it's real
I have multiple answers to that. I believe free will is part of our cognitive abilities that has a supernatural origin – we were created in the image and likeness of God. I also believe humankind never lost the image and likeness of God – although according to Scripture that image and likeness is tarnished – i.e., damaged – our sinful nature. I believe free will is a capability everyone has and for the Christian it means choosing the options mentioned in passages like Romans 7 and Romans 8 to deal effectively / productively with our sinful nature.
You’re repeating yourself – please reread my above answers
Edited by T-Bonedo you think editing is real or an illusion?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Ok, I finally see it.
But now I have to go back and see the context. It has something to do with the softballs not being padding, but to make it more comfortable. I am remembering more as I type.
First off, I was addressing the softballs and the slightly uncomfortable item to everyone, not just you. I think that is why I dismissed this as too complicated to get into and moved on. I concede that may have looked like a dodge, but I was just prioritizing what other responses I had to type out, and avoided it. I am addressing it now for your sake.
Before I go back to check the context, I can say this about the comfortableness.
Yes, I admit that I was uncomfortable about changing from "free will is supernatural" to "free will is natural" about 9 years ago. I have already admitted that about 3 other times on this thread.
I have noticed over the years that MANY things about free will make people uncomfortable, and I have mentioned that several times here.
One of the big things that makes people uncomfortable is that maybe we aren't so wonderful and glorious after all. Francis Crick called facing this idea ASTONISHING, that we are natural and physical, and our brains and minds are not at all supernatural. I am calling the same idea UNCOMFORTABLE to lots of people. I was just guessing if you found it uncomfortable to think of free will as natural.
And now we are full circle.
I am less dense.
You have your answer. I was not projecting; just making an educated guess that you, too, would be uncomfortable with the statement that free will is ONLY a natural phenomenon.
Was my guess correct?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Itll intrepret itself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I have not mentioned this lately, but last year I had 4 eye surgeries. Right now I have massive muscle co-ordination problems that force me to squint one eye or wear an eyepatch to read with my best eye.
I also have lost 80% of my peripheral vision to glaucoma, with blind spots that necessitate my "roving" over a scene or a screen to see everything.
It was the case that I did not see your question well enough when I went back to look this morning.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Finally, the last horse crosses the finish line. Or does it?
But also to me. Once again why would I be uncomfortable about an obvious statement?
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with bull. The above quite is Grade A bull.
Yah,sure,that's why you failed to mention them again, right? This is your I mentioned them before trick. Sorry, not buying it.
So your saying God lied to us?
To be honest I couldn't care less one way or the other. God says he gave us free will. You believe it or you don't. Makes little difference to me.
No, you claim we've come full circle. You still haven't explained to me what you're so uncomfortable about that you have to project it onto me.
Again, you claim I have my answer. I don't. What you gave me was a lot of bull.
Yes you were.
Call it what you want. There are two people in this conversation, if it didn't come from me, where did it come from?
No, your guess was an attempt to not only bull me, but an attempt to bull yourself.
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
What the hell are you talking about?!?!
If one can NUDGE a robot that is considered remote control. What a stupid metaphor!
Now you have a mishmash of mixed up metaphors: installing software into gears, levers, fluids, bones, etc…I guess you are talking about programs and other operating information used by a computer – software as opposed to hardware… and you assume love – which is to be brief, an intense feeling of deep affection, a great interest and pleasure in something, feeling a deep affection for someone or something – can be reduced to a series of coded software instructions to control the operation of a computer or other machine….yeeech ! there is NOTHING – NOTHING - NOTHING “genuinely special” about that...this love is not genuine - nor special - it's preprogrammed
Edited by T-Bonenothing special here
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
More nonsense!
+ 
= 
Our greatest freedom is the ability to choose a response!
Freedom of the mind requires not only, or not even specially, the absence of legal constraints but the presence of alternative thoughts. The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities..... Allan Bloom... The Closing of the American Mind
Edited by T-Boneeditor-in-chief of all that is Bull-Shonta
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Unfortunately, it is impossible to abstract any medical treatments from your nonsensical thesis, however that’s not without precedence
curious what is a “raging need” ? Is that anything like symptoms of violent uncontrollable hormones or trolling?
Edited by T-Bonethe raging editor
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Ok, so you came close to answering my question here.
Do you have a scripture reference for God saying we have free will?
I want to consider all the evidence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Im genuinely sorry to hears of your difficulties. That does suck and I hope your are recovering and doing better overall.
The search feature should help out in this regard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
You haven't answered my question about what makes you so uncomfortable that you'd project it onto me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Not so fast! I thought it was what we BELEEEVED that mattered.
We were taught by T7TMOG that what we DO only matters if we BELIEVE it does.
So many of us didn't ABSORB the material the first time. It's time to get back to the originals and relearn what was taught by closing our minds to confirm our bias.
Edited by Nathan_JrThrice
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I did not project it on you, but only guessed it on to you, mainly because so many others are uncomfortable about free will being natural. I have interviewed a lot of people about this over the years. I wrote of this in my book chapters.
Edited by MikeMy discomfort at the notion of free will being natural INTENSE when I first faced it in High School. But a lot of that discomfort subsided and was turned to a fascination when I got into the Bible about 4 years later. I vaguely remember the discomfort to be a threat to my Roman Catholic faith or attempt to have faith. It was like, "If there is no free will, then maybe there is no God!" and that was very uncomfortable to me.
Late edit: add to this the discomfort I had 9 years ago when I switched from spiritual free will to natural free will. That was pretty intense discomfort also, but it subsided pretty fast, after the novelty wore off.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
It still matters.
Edited by MikeWhy do you think that having a robot-like body/soul would get rid of the importance of believing?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Still handing me bull. The fact that you're trying to get away from it, tells me something is there.
Remember what I said about the size of the post, being off point, and the attempt to snow?
What is causing discomfort in you now?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
That most of this will be cut out of my future boilerplate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.