LOL!

A rational, inteligent, intellectually honest person with free will could not possibly make such a claim because it is blatantly and incontrovertably irrational to the point of being insane. IMO, only an entity without free will, programmed to spout such nonsense could do so without the deliberate attempt to deceive or confuse others, something not apparent in the case of Provine and many others.

IMO, this is evidence that not all humans have free will. It is, after all, only adherence to certain theological principles that one assumes that all humans have free will; it’s certainly not based on evidence as far as I can see.

I know for a fact that some of us are here for fun, with no expectation of changing anyone’s mind.

You are helping to prove that your position is based on nothing but bald assertions.

Thank you.

—-Mung: “They can’t help it?”

Very good, Mung.

If they don’t, then they are doubly illogical. Of course, once one abandons reason, anything is possible.

—–“Second, you assume that all of us are trying to change minds. That’s not true. I know for a fact that some of us are here for fun, with no expectation of changing anyone’s mind.”

Of course it’s true. You don’t want onlookers to believe me when I tell them the truth, namely that materialists are irrational. Unfortunately, you have no arguments to make that wish come true.

—-“Third, you claim that if materialism is true, then the evolutionary process determines what we believe. This is obviously false. Genetic determinism need not be true even if the universe as a whole is deterministic. Think about it.”

A materialist must be a determinist by definition. Think about it.

—-“Fourth, you are making a common logical mistake in claiming that if determinism is true, then it is impossible for one person to influence another. Again, this is obviously false.”

A materialist cannot be consistent and speak of influencing a person to take action different from that which matter would force him to take. If influence doesn’t lead to action or a mental state different from what fate had in mind, it isn’t influence. The whole point of influencing is to change attitudes and behavior from that which could have been otherwise. You have been reading too many books written by compatibilists. Burn them and start studying G.K. Chesterton and C.S. Lewis before it’s too late.

—–Likewise, suppose one person converses with another in a deterministic universe. As a result of what Person A says, person B comes to believe that Zamfir is a great musician. Person A has influenced person B, even if was determined, at the time of the Big Bang, that they would have that exact conversation. Determinism does not preclude the possibility of one person influencing another.”

Reread the above.

—–“Don’t feel too bad about it, Stephen. Lots of people get confused when thinking about free will and determinism.”

Why should I feel bad about refuting you? Free will and determinism are mutually exclusive, except of course, for those who redefine free will so they can have it both ways. That, by the way, is the foundation of your confusion.

Lots of people get confused when thinking about free will and determinism.

They can’t help it?

Indeed, Materialist/Darwinists contradict their own philosophy and exhibit their own irrationality by simply visiting this site—as if they could influence anyone to believe something other than that which the evolutionary process has caused them to believe.

First, not all materialists deny the existence of free will.

Second, you assume that all of us are trying to change minds. That’s not true. I know for a fact that some of us are here for fun, with no expectation of changing anyone’s mind.

Third, you claim that if materialism is true, then the evolutionary process determines what we believe. This is obviously false. Genetic determinism need not be true even if the universe as a whole is deterministic. Think about it.

Fourth, you are making a common logical mistake in claiming that if determinism is true, then it is impossible for one person to influence another. Again, this is obviously false.

Suppose a person drops a rock off a bridge in a deterministic universe. It hits the water and makes a loud splash. The person caused the splash by dropping the rock. This is true whether or not the act of dropping the rock was a product of free will.

Likewise, suppose one person converses with another in a deterministic universe. As a result of what Person A says, person B comes to believe that Zamfir is a great musician. Person A has influenced person B, even if was determined, at the time of the Big Bang, that they would have that exact conversation. Determinism does not preclude the possibility of one person influencing another.

Don’t feel too bad about it, Stephen. Lots of people get confused when thinking about free will and determinism.

Gil is right. The issue is not that the materialist would have no choice but to get angry. The issue is that he would have no reason for getting angry in the first place. One only gets angry when others misuse their free will—when they fail to do that which they could have done and should done or when they do that which they need not have done and should not have done. Only free will permits those kinds of choices.

Indeed, Materialist/Darwinists contradict their own philosophy and exhibit their own irrationality by simply visiting this site—as if they could influence anyone to believe something other than that which the evolutionary process has caused them to believe.