promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
"What do the words 'free will' even mean or refer to, to you "promethean75", which you believe, absolutely, and keep trying to insist here does not exist?"
Here u go age. A post I made when I first came over here that'll answer your question. I refer u to it becuz I've been over this freewill/determinism stuff so many times I can't be bothered to re-explain it all every time somebody akses me to.
So, you come to a philosophy forum, say, state, and/or claim some things, but cannot be bothered to explain things every time someone asks you to.
Are you aware that not everyone goes back through everything you have written, just to see if you have explained one or another very specific thing?
And, if you feel somewhat 'bothered' being asked to explain one or more of your very unique positions, perspectives, or views, then are you sure a philosophy forum is really the right place for you to be?
After all a part of philosophical discussions is being able to back up and support what one says, claims, or states, and thus being able, and ready, to be questioned and/or challenged over one's own words.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
Do me (and u) a favor tho. After u read this and don't understand any of it, save yourself the trouble of aksing me more questions that I won't answer.
Once again, what we can clearly see here is another absolute belief that this one holds to be absolutely true, while at the same time showing how it cannot even back up and support what it claims is absolutely true. Which, usually, means that what it is saying, stating, and/or claiming is just False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect.
But, we will wait, to see.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
...
Okay here's a really easy way to explain it which will help you understand what role platonic/Cartesian substance dualism has in the freewill thesis, and how it fails to make any sense whatsoever.
1. What fails to make any sense, to you, may not be the case for any or every other one.
2. I really do not care about any 'thesis' here. I prefer to only look at what is actually True and Right, instead.
3. What role so-called 'platonic/cartesian substance dualism, supposedly, has in what you call 'the freewill thesis', we will wait to see has absolutely any thing to do what what I actually asked you to provide here.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
When a person makes a choice to do or not do something, that choice is followed either by a physical action or, in the case of doing nothing, the inhibition of a physical action.
Very quickly we can start to see that this one's very own unique definition of 'free will' is why it says, states, and claims some of the things that it does here.
Just so you become aware, different people have different definitions for the term or phrase 'free will'.
And, only 'a definition', which can fit in, perfectly, with all other words, and their definitions, and which shows, illustrates, or paints a completely Accurate and True Picture of Life, and living, Itself, is the only definitions worthy of being looked, and discussed here.
We are, obviously, and by the way, still waiting for you to show and reveal to us how you define what the 'free will' term or phrase means, or refers to, to you, exactly, "promethean75".
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
Okay so how does the human body set itself into motion (or not)?
Through, by, and with 'thought', obviously.
Considering to what you were previously referring to.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
Where does this process of moving, begin?
From thought.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
That's right, very good! In the nervous system.
Sounds like you here believe, absolutely, that this is actually true and right, correct?
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
And what organ controls the nervous system in its coordination of physical movement?
Is it the human brain?
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
Hey you're getting good at this.
If you say and believe so.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
Okay, so then how does the brain work...
Exactly like a computer does.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
how does it communicate with the muscles?
Yes!! Jesus you guys are like regular neurologists.
Which guys?
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
I might have to retract what I said earlier about'cha.
What did you say about us or them, earlier?
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
Through the nerves. And what are the nerves, essentially? Circuits that carry charges.
Now let's back up for a second and go back to the brain. Before this communication with the muscles through the nerve circuit occurs, a charge must be produced by ionized potassium particles travelling across and through the membrane of a cool little joint called a dendrite... and these sit on the ends of nerves called axons.
Okay, so, in order to produce communication with a nerve leading to a muscle which will produce physical movement, the dendrite must discharge those ionized particles and send a transmitter across a space called a synapse, to another dendrite. Pretty neat, right?
What would be much more so-called 'neater' would be if you just informed us of what the words 'free will' mean, or refer to, to you, exactly.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
So what happens is, a dendrite will either fire - if what's called an action potential is built by the charge - or not. If it does, the transmitters stimulate the receiving dendrite to send a signal down the axon, through the nerve, and to the muscle.
And wah-lah, you stand up from your chair. It's totally awesome.
Now watch this. Where, and at what point in this chain of events, does 'freewill' enter into the equation?
From my perspective exactly where the 'free will' is, exactly.
But, from your perspective, we are still waiting to find out and see how you define the 'free will' words, first.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
We've established that it's the electrical impulse that stimulates the muscle movement. And we know what causes this electrical impulse; ionized particles travelling across a membrane.
Once more we can clearly see here another prime example of how and when people will say just about absolutely anything at all, just in the hope that it would back up and support what they believe is absolute true, right, accurate, and correct.
That is; they will say just about anything except for the actual 'thing' that was asked for, for clarification.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
Uh-oh... now we have a problem.
you and some others might, but 'we' certainly do not now have a problem.
We are just, still, waiting for you to explain what the words 'free will' means, or refers to, to you.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
If this entire process is physical, beginning with the choice to get up, and the result of getting up, how can we say that the choice is not also a result of the same process... only at a prior time preceding the result of getting up? Does the act of choosing originate in some other way that doesn't involve the processes we've described?
A substance dualist will claim that there is an immaterial substance in the body that acts upon the body to generate that electrical process, but which cannot be observed while doing so.
Well obviously a so-called 'immaterial substance', itself, cannot be observed, with the physical eyes.
promethean75 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 11, 2024 12:48 pm
This immaterial substance does the thinking, makes a choice, and then presto... the electrical process begins to put the body in motion. Moreover, not only is this immaterial substance 'free' of the physical causes that create the organized process of such nervous activity, but it can also act as a causative agent itself, much like a cluster of ionized particles.
Alrighty now let's do a quick little multiple choice at this point before we go further. Select an answer from the following options:
A) this sounds cool af so imma be a Cartesian. Fuck science and the principle of verifiability.
B) wait let me read this whole post again.
C) why doesn't prom75 allow me to continue believing I am right. He's such an asshole.
D) I am a moron who never had a fucking clue what I was talking about when I said freewill exists.
Once again, will you just answer, and thus clarify, what do the words 'free will' mean, or refer to, to you, exactly, "promethean75"?
If no, then why not?