The brain still has causal power in all metabolism such as digestion and even unconscious decision.Noax wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:50 pmI don't disagree with that, but you are claiming that all that thought is disregarded, with conscious decisions not being influenced by that thought. Hence it going to waste. There is no point in thought if it doesn't lead to productive action. The brain is just a huge expense of metabolism that is needless if it lets new causal chains choose the actions.
There is no decision involved when rain makes the grass wet. This is comprehensible in materialism framework. The problem is conscious decision.
How materialism define conscious decision?Noax wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:50 pmThis just shows that materialism does not define 'conscious decision' that way. I agree, it leads to inconsistency. So premise 2 is demonstrably false in the materialist framework. So what? Point 2 has not been shown to be the case (and has in fact been demonstrated to be absurd even in dualistic framework), so materialism itself is still consistent. You seem not to recognize this blatant use of argument begging.No, I am exactly assuming X="conscious decision is true withing materialist framework" then show a inconsistency.
Mind is not the result of evolution. I can fast and die for specific purpose after the firm decision is made.Noax wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:50 pmBut you say that conscious decision is not, so it is not based on the thought. What purpose is served by the calorie burning thought then? It forces us to find considerably more food than we would otherwise require, an evolutionary disadvantage if it has no benefit.Yes, I agree that thought is part of causal chain.
No. Only the another premise is false when we agree that conscious decision is real based on an argument.Noax wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:50 pmI'm arguing about it because it (as you have defined it) is absurd. Accepting it as a premise just shows that the premise is false when it leads to contradiction, as you have shown in your OP.We need to show that conscious decision is real. We can accept it as a premises or argue about it.
(1) is our only premises. (2) has to be true given (1). (3) is a fact very well accept within materialist. Therefore (1) is wrong.Noax wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:50 pmI agree, (1) is wrong, but not because of (3). It is just a self-inconsistent assumption.I see what do you mean. Let me write in more clear way
1) Consciousness decision (the ability to create a chain of causality) is real and it is the result of matter formation (assumption)
2) This means that one can break causality by arranging matter in specific form
3) This is impossible within materialism framework
4) Therefore (1) is wrong
Point 2 as worded is allowed, but only because it doesn't say that arranging matter in specific form doesn't require a break in causality.
Point 3 still stands, since point 1 (but not point 2) is impossible within materialism framework. It indeed doesn't describe materialism.
You have succeeded (in step 3 actually) in proving that point 1 does not describe materialism. So what? Point 4 says that point 1 is just wrong, but doesn't follow since there is no premise that materialism is true.
Yes, you can even shorten it more:Noax wrote: ↑Wed Jun 20, 2018 5:50 pmOK, let's give up (b). Now it reads thus:This means that we have go give up either (a) conscious decision is real or (b) conscious decision is the result of matter formation. One can argue in favor of (a) therefore we have to give up (b).
1) Consciousness decision (the ability to create a chain of causality) is real (assumption)
2) This means that one can break causality by arranging matter in specific form <-- Irrelevant to (3) below, but I kept it.
3) This is impossible within materialism framework
4) Therefore (1) is not consistent with the materialism framework
I changed the wording of (4) since "(1) is wrong" just doesn't follow from the prior 3 points. I think it is wrong anyway, but my argument is by reductio ad absurdum, not by the steps you put forth here.
1) Consciousness decision (by definition, the ability to create a chain of causality) is real (assumption)
2) This is impossible within materialism framework
3) Therefore (1) is not consistent with the materialism framework