On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:32 AM, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com>wrote:
There are, of course, undiscovered scientific facts. If scientists did not
>> believe that they would give up science. But Craig is not saying that there
>> are processes inside cells that are controlled by as yet undiscovered
>> physical effects. What he is saying is that if I decide to move my arm the
>> arm will move not due to the well-studied sequence of neurological events,
>> but "spontaneously", due to my will.
> UGH. No. I say that if I move my arm, the arm will move because I AM
> whatever sequence of events on whatever level - molecular, biochemical,
> physiological, whether well-studied or not. You may not be able to
> understand that what I intend is not to squeeze myself into biology, or to
> magically replace biology, but to present that the entirety of the physics
> of my body intersects with the entirety of the physics of my experience.
> The two aesthetics - public bodies in space and private experiences through
> time, are an involuted (Ouroboran, umbilical, involuted) Monism. If you
> don't understand what that means then you are arguing with a straw man.
If you ARE the sequence of neurological events and the neurological events
follow deterministic or probabilistic rules then you will also follow
deterministic or probabilistic rules. However, you don't believe that this
is the case. So sometimes there must be neurological events which are
"spontaneous" according to your definition - outside the normal causal
chain. Absent this, you return to the default scientific position.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.