j: I guess that's the nub of the problem. Some people seem to think that a "you" exists independently of the brain.
So far I've had no luck in getting anyone to locate that "you" which seems to be something like cloud computing.
No, this I, this you, this self, is the consummation of everything about the organism: the brain, the body, the experiences, the memories, feelings, intelligence, skills, talents, everything. I am more than the sum of my parts, as are you, but that isn't to say that I exist independently of my brain.
Mind you, there are poorly written posts and many confusions and misunderstandings. There are assumptions, insinuations, and innuendoes, and all of the things that make for a lack of good communication. I'm just as guilty as anyone else on this I suppose, but from here on in I will do my best to be clear, to carefully read and edit my posts (hoping others will do the same), and to refrain from being naughty on purpose.
What I believe we "free willers" are trying to say is that nature's technology (to steal a phrase from whynot) is ages (many of them) ahead of our own. The smartest humans who ever lived have not figured out how consciousness, sentience, identity, arises in the organism. There are many theories, there is much knowledge, but there is no literal understanding of this phenomenon as of yet, at least not here on Terra Firma.
Nature and the processes of evolution have brought about quite an astounding organic machine called a human being. At least it astounds me, and it should astound every other person, but it could very well be that there is nothing particularly noteworthy about us to other beings in the universe; in fact we may seem puny to other life forms, or perhaps amusing, or cute; or we may be something like a pestilence. Or a food source at some point in our future? Who knows?
Consciousness, identity, ego, person-hood, self-hood, these are amazing tools, the result of unimaginable ages and ages of evolution. To call them illusory is an insult to nature, and a very grave mistake, for they are the very things that have brought about science, progress, and civilization. The theory of Rights (to name just one human invention) makes no sense without the I's and You's of the world having the intelligence, the will, and the moral fortitude to write it out, to understand it, and to obey it.
If you guys aren't calling consciousness, ego, self-hood, determination, identity (all the ingredients for the property of human actions called free will) illusions - manufactured by brains as a useful means of propagating the human species - then I apologize, but it seems I have seen that very idea stated quite explicitly many times in this sub-forum.
Or is it just the word "free" that's troublesome? Like toker, (I believe, though I could be wrong) I don't care if the term free will is discarded forever. Free will is will, there is no difference. If it aint free, it aint will. The will being defined as the ability to govern one's actions deliberately, with reason or without, in accordance with one's desires or in defiance of one's desires. For good or for evil.
Let us understand one another, if we are to have some progress in this sub-forum.
So far I've had no luck in getting anyone to locate that "you" which seems to be something like cloud computing.
No, this I, this you, this self, is the consummation of everything about the organism: the brain, the body, the experiences, the memories, feelings, intelligence, skills, talents, everything. I am more than the sum of my parts, as are you, but that isn't to say that I exist independently of my brain.
Mind you, there are poorly written posts and many confusions and misunderstandings. There are assumptions, insinuations, and innuendoes, and all of the things that make for a lack of good communication. I'm just as guilty as anyone else on this I suppose, but from here on in I will do my best to be clear, to carefully read and edit my posts (hoping others will do the same), and to refrain from being naughty on purpose.
What I believe we "free willers" are trying to say is that nature's technology (to steal a phrase from whynot) is ages (many of them) ahead of our own. The smartest humans who ever lived have not figured out how consciousness, sentience, identity, arises in the organism. There are many theories, there is much knowledge, but there is no literal understanding of this phenomenon as of yet, at least not here on Terra Firma.
Nature and the processes of evolution have brought about quite an astounding organic machine called a human being. At least it astounds me, and it should astound every other person, but it could very well be that there is nothing particularly noteworthy about us to other beings in the universe; in fact we may seem puny to other life forms, or perhaps amusing, or cute; or we may be something like a pestilence. Or a food source at some point in our future? Who knows?
Consciousness, identity, ego, person-hood, self-hood, these are amazing tools, the result of unimaginable ages and ages of evolution. To call them illusory is an insult to nature, and a very grave mistake, for they are the very things that have brought about science, progress, and civilization. The theory of Rights (to name just one human invention) makes no sense without the I's and You's of the world having the intelligence, the will, and the moral fortitude to write it out, to understand it, and to obey it.
If you guys aren't calling consciousness, ego, self-hood, determination, identity (all the ingredients for the property of human actions called free will) illusions - manufactured by brains as a useful means of propagating the human species - then I apologize, but it seems I have seen that very idea stated quite explicitly many times in this sub-forum.
Or is it just the word "free" that's troublesome? Like toker, (I believe, though I could be wrong) I don't care if the term free will is discarded forever. Free will is will, there is no difference. If it aint free, it aint will. The will being defined as the ability to govern one's actions deliberately, with reason or without, in accordance with one's desires or in defiance of one's desires. For good or for evil.
Let us understand one another, if we are to have some progress in this sub-forum.
